Skip to content

It’s always the economy, stupid – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,845
edited December 16 in General
It’s always the economy, stupid – politicalbetting.com

Americans ain't buying Trump's economic spin. The % saying we're on the wrong economic track has skyrocketed since Jan from 43% to 56%.This has caused a massive shift to the left on who's trusted more on inflation: it's now Dems +4 pts vs. GOP +14 going into the 2022 midterms. pic.twitter.com/nAnn2LCRZG

Read the full story here

«1345

Comments

  • Smart51Smart51 Posts: 85
    MAGA cheered when Trump introduced tariffs. Now they're upset. Who is the bigger fool, the fool or the fool who follows him?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 57,123
    Smart51 said:

    MAGA cheered when Trump introduced tariffs. Now they're upset. Who is the bigger fool, the fool or the fool who follows him?

    Fool me once shame on you. Fool me in excess of 1 bn times, shame on MAGA.
  • BattlebusBattlebus Posts: 2,130
    One of my favourite companies is iRobot who were the first to bring in robot cleaners. A genuinely world beating product out of MIT and I think some of them went onto Boston Robotics. To cut costs, as many leading US companies did they shipped manufacturing out to China (who replicated the technology) and the Far East. Trumps 45% tariffs have killed the company.

    *The article notes that the EU spoiled Amazon's chances to but them for $1.7bn last year. It's now worth $140mn which has saved Bezos a lot of cash.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1lr75lp239o
  • eekeek Posts: 32,166
    Utterly offtopic - but there is 25% off Interrail tickets if you buy them before 9am tomorrow and you can get a full refund any time in the next 11 months if you don't use them

    https://allaboard.eu/interrail

    Can't work out if we are going to travel down to Portugal or Southern Italy now but it should be a fun holiday..
  • DopermeanDopermean Posts: 2,029
    DavidL said:

    Smart51 said:

    MAGA cheered when Trump introduced tariffs. Now they're upset. Who is the bigger fool, the fool or the fool who follows him?

    Fool me once shame on you. Fool me in excess of 1 bn times, shame on MAGA.
    Not like he hadn't given evidence of his economic prowess in his first term.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 57,123
    Dopermean said:

    DavidL said:

    Smart51 said:

    MAGA cheered when Trump introduced tariffs. Now they're upset. Who is the bigger fool, the fool or the fool who follows him?

    Fool me once shame on you. Fool me in excess of 1 bn times, shame on MAGA.
    Not like he hadn't given evidence of his economic prowess in his first term.
    We're talking about a man who lost serious money owning casinos.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 132,138
    Yes if Trump sees his party lose power next year it will be because of rising prices and inflation not his behaviour. Of course Al Capone was only brought down in the end because of money and tax
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 54,411
    rcs1000 said:

    One of the issues with tariffs that tends to get underplayed is that domestic firms will tend to raise their prices if foreign competitors get hit by tariffs.

    So: imagine that there are currently two suppliers of widgets, each costing $5.00, and one is domestic and the other foreign.

    Tariffs put $2 on the price of imported widgets, and so people might thing the domestic producer would now sell twice as many widgets for $5.

    What actually happens is that the domestic producer raises their price to $6.99, and -price elasticity being what it is- sells 1.5x as many widgets, but at 40% more per widget.

    That is profit maximizing behaviour for the widget manufacturer but shows up in higher prices for everyone.

    True, but the other reason for domestic inflation is Trumps budget deficit. This injects money into the economy increasind demand.

    Sure like Wylie Coyote can run in the air for a bit, the plummet is inevitable.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 17,500
    rcs1000 said:

    One of the issues with tariffs that tends to get underplayed is that domestic firms will tend to raise their prices if foreign competitors get hit by tariffs.

    So: imagine that there are currently two suppliers of widgets, each costing $5.00, and one is domestic and the other foreign.

    Tariffs put $2 on the price of imported widgets, and so people might thing the domestic producer would now sell twice as many widgets for $5.

    What actually happens is that the domestic producer raises their price to $6.99, and -price elasticity being what it is- sells 1.5x as many widgets, but at 40% more per widget.

    That is profit maximizing behaviour for the widget manufacturer but shows up in higher prices for everyone.

    Yes who could possibly have predicted this? Last time Trump put tariffs on washing machines, and prices of washing machines went up. But prices of driers went up too even though they were not tariffed. Because retailers traditionally sold them at the same price.
    Economic analysis of the Trump 1.0 tariffs suggest they created additional jobs in manufacturing, at a cost to the consumer of $500k/job.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 54,411
    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, this being a Labour government, UK unemployment continues to rise: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98nqe0m008o

    And sometimes words just fail me:

    "Annual average earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector, across the three-month period."

    What public sector wage settlements between August and October are those? I don't recall any.

    NHS medical staff got 4% this year and non-medical staff 3.6%. It was backdated to April but paid in August, so is that where the 7.6% comes from?
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 12,838
    edited December 16
    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, this being a Labour government, UK unemployment continues to rise: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98nqe0m008o

    And sometimes words just fail me:

    "Annual average earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector, across the three-month period."

    Isn't it the case that public sector wages lag private sector wages - pay settlements tend to be based on historic rates of inflation. In fact, you can see that quite clearly here in Figure 4/5, with public sector wages well behind private sector during the post-COVID period: https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/bulletins/averageweeklyearningsingreatbritain/december2025
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 27,507
    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, this being a Labour government, UK unemployment continues to rise: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98nqe0m008o

    And sometimes words just fail me:

    "Annual average earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector, across the three-month period."

    What public sector wage settlements between August and October are those? I don't recall any.

    NHS medical staff got 4% this year and non-medical staff 3.6%. It was backdated to April but paid in August, so is that where the 7.6% comes from?
    Aggregate statistics, isn't it? As someone who has worked in the civil service for 16 years, the biggest way public sector workers get a pay rise is by doing the same job at a higher band. It happens a lot.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 57,123
    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, this being a Labour government, UK unemployment continues to rise: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98nqe0m008o

    And sometimes words just fail me:

    "Annual average earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector, across the three-month period."

    What public sector wage settlements between August and October are those? I don't recall any.

    NHS medical staff got 4% this year and non-medical staff 3.6%. It was backdated to April but paid in August, so is that where the 7.6% comes from?
    I honestly don't know. I don't know anyone getting 7.6%, let alone figures that make that an average. But this is from the BBC so I presume it is official statistics.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 84,498
    If the BBC needs tips on how to respond to Trump's "powerhouse" lawsuit, this's should help.

    Pulitzer Prize Board members dump broad discovery demands on Trump for tax returns, psych records, and 'any' prescription meds history*
    https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/pulitzer-prize-board-members-fight-back-with-wide-ranging-discovery-demands-including-about-trump-finances/

    *He's also claiming "emotional damage"
  • BattlebusBattlebus Posts: 2,130
    tlg86 said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, this being a Labour government, UK unemployment continues to rise: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98nqe0m008o

    And sometimes words just fail me:

    "Annual average earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector, across the three-month period."

    What public sector wage settlements between August and October are those? I don't recall any.

    NHS medical staff got 4% this year and non-medical staff 3.6%. It was backdated to April but paid in August, so is that where the 7.6% comes from?
    Aggregate statistics, isn't it? As someone who has worked in the civil service for 16 years, the biggest way public sector workers get a pay rise is by doing the same job at a higher band. It happens a lot.
    How did you manage 16 years. My first job was HMRC and it took me 9 months to get out.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 27,507
    Battlebus said:

    tlg86 said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, this being a Labour government, UK unemployment continues to rise: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98nqe0m008o

    And sometimes words just fail me:

    "Annual average earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector, across the three-month period."

    What public sector wage settlements between August and October are those? I don't recall any.

    NHS medical staff got 4% this year and non-medical staff 3.6%. It was backdated to April but paid in August, so is that where the 7.6% comes from?
    Aggregate statistics, isn't it? As someone who has worked in the civil service for 16 years, the biggest way public sector workers get a pay rise is by doing the same job at a higher band. It happens a lot.
    How did you manage 16 years. My first job was HMRC and it took me 9 months to get out.
    I don't know, it's a question I ask myself a lot!
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 84,498
    DavidL said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, this being a Labour government, UK unemployment continues to rise: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98nqe0m008o

    And sometimes words just fail me:

    "Annual average earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector, across the three-month period."

    What public sector wage settlements between August and October are those? I don't recall any.

    NHS medical staff got 4% this year and non-medical staff 3.6%. It was backdated to April but paid in August, so is that where the 7.6% comes from?
    I honestly don't know. I don't know anyone getting 7.6%, let alone figures that make that an average. But this is from the BBC so I presume it is official statistics.
    Reporters really should pick this up and go back to the source (which took me all of 30sec).

    .... However, the public sector annual growth rate is affected by some public sector pay rises being paid earlier in 2025 than in 2024. RTI pay data are also published and provide a provisional, timelier estimate of median pay. The two data sources generally trend well for mean total pay...

    So something of a statistical artifact from annualising quarterly pay numbers, which shot up compared with the prior year's quarter, because the early pay awards this year simply weren't in the numbers last year.

    There ought to be a corresponding drop in the next quarter, I think ?
  • DopermeanDopermean Posts: 2,029
    Nigelb said:

    If the BBC needs tips on how to respond to Trump's "powerhouse" lawsuit, this's should help.

    Pulitzer Prize Board members dump broad discovery demands on Trump for tax returns, psych records, and 'any' prescription meds history*
    https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/pulitzer-prize-board-members-fight-back-with-wide-ranging-discovery-demands-including-about-trump-finances/

    *He's also claiming "emotional damage"

    Surprised they found a law firm prepared to do it for them given that'll be the end of any govt work until he's gone.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 45,485
    Eabhal said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, this being a Labour government, UK unemployment continues to rise: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98nqe0m008o

    And sometimes words just fail me:

    "Annual average earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector, across the three-month period."

    Isn't it the case that public sector wages lag private sector wages - pay settlements tend to be based on historic rates of inflation. In fact, you can see that quite clearly here in Figure 4/5, with public sector wages well behind private sector during the post-COVID period: https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/bulletins/averageweeklyearningsingreatbritain/december2025
    add pension contributions , cushy number , conditions etc and it is the opposite.
  • DopermeanDopermean Posts: 2,029
    Nigelb said:

    DavidL said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, this being a Labour government, UK unemployment continues to rise: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98nqe0m008o

    And sometimes words just fail me:

    "Annual average earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector, across the three-month period."

    What public sector wage settlements between August and October are those? I don't recall any.

    NHS medical staff got 4% this year and non-medical staff 3.6%. It was backdated to April but paid in August, so is that where the 7.6% comes from?
    I honestly don't know. I don't know anyone getting 7.6%, let alone figures that make that an average. But this is from the BBC so I presume it is official statistics.
    Reporters really should pick this up and go back to the source (which took me all of 30sec).

    .... However, the public sector annual growth rate is affected by some public sector pay rises being paid earlier in 2025 than in 2024. RTI pay data are also published and provide a provisional, timelier estimate of median pay. The two data sources generally trend well for mean total pay...

    So something of a statistical artifact from annualising quarterly pay numbers, which shot up compared with the prior year's quarter, because the early pay awards this year simply weren't in the numbers last year.

    There ought to be a corresponding drop in the next quarter, I think ?
    Journalists lazy / deliberately misrepresenting facts shocker.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 84,498
    Dopermean said:

    Nigelb said:

    If the BBC needs tips on how to respond to Trump's "powerhouse" lawsuit, this's should help.

    Pulitzer Prize Board members dump broad discovery demands on Trump for tax returns, psych records, and 'any' prescription meds history*
    https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/pulitzer-prize-board-members-fight-back-with-wide-ranging-discovery-demands-including-about-trump-finances/

    *He's also claiming "emotional damage"

    Surprised they found a law firm prepared to do it for them given that'll be the end of any govt work until he's gone.
    There are plenty of law firms who've taken the decision to live with those consequences.
    (I know, it's astonishing that there still exist lawyers with principles.)
  • Good morning

    Poor economic news this morning but absolutely no surprise

    Handing huge public sector pay rises whilst at the same time clobbering business with additional taxes and awarding massive increases in the minimum wage to young workers results in devastating employment and prospects especially for the young

    Why would any business employ young workers when they can, for the same wage engage mature and experience staff

    Labour often talk about Truss, but Starmer and Reeves have done far more long term damage to the economy and it will be very difficult to reverse

    Add in the workers rights bill and the country can now see why ''Labour is not working'
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 26,204
    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, this being a Labour government, UK unemployment continues to rise: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98nqe0m008o

    And sometimes words just fail me:

    "Annual average earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector, across the three-month period."

    It is partly a timing calculation issue. Sounds like the 7.6% is for two years of pay rises due to the strikes and late wage settlements in 2024.

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/bulletins/uklabourmarket/december2025

    "Annual average regular earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector. However, the public sector annual growth rate is affected by some public sector pay rises being paid earlier in 2025 than in 2024."
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 18,672
    DavidL said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, this being a Labour government, UK unemployment continues to rise: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98nqe0m008o

    And sometimes words just fail me:

    "Annual average earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector, across the three-month period."

    What public sector wage settlements between August and October are those? I don't recall any.

    NHS medical staff got 4% this year and non-medical staff 3.6%. It was backdated to April but paid in August, so is that where the 7.6% comes from?
    I honestly don't know. I don't know anyone getting 7.6%, let alone figures that make that an average. But this is from the BBC so I presume it is official statistics.
    These people reckon 3.8% public sector versus 3% private.

    https://www.theglobalrecruiter.com/public-sector-pushes-median-pay-award-above-3-per-cent/
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 84,498
    Dopermean said:

    Nigelb said:

    DavidL said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, this being a Labour government, UK unemployment continues to rise: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98nqe0m008o

    And sometimes words just fail me:

    "Annual average earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector, across the three-month period."

    What public sector wage settlements between August and October are those? I don't recall any.

    NHS medical staff got 4% this year and non-medical staff 3.6%. It was backdated to April but paid in August, so is that where the 7.6% comes from?
    I honestly don't know. I don't know anyone getting 7.6%, let alone figures that make that an average. But this is from the BBC so I presume it is official statistics.
    Reporters really should pick this up and go back to the source (which took me all of 30sec).

    .... However, the public sector annual growth rate is affected by some public sector pay rises being paid earlier in 2025 than in 2024. RTI pay data are also published and provide a provisional, timelier estimate of median pay. The two data sources generally trend well for mean total pay...

    So something of a statistical artifact from annualising quarterly pay numbers, which shot up compared with the prior year's quarter, because the early pay awards this year simply weren't in the numbers last year.

    There ought to be a corresponding drop in the next quarter, I think ?
    Journalists lazy / deliberately misrepresenting facts shocker.
    No, just not numerically literate, I suspect.
    And tbf most of us were happy to jump to the same conclusion and start moralising over it, without asking any questions ourselves.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 76,426
    That tweet is remarkably poorly phrased. It makes it sound like the Democrats are at +4% and the Republicans at +14% at the moment, rather than making it clear the latter was at the last set of elections.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 36,410
    edited December 16
    eek said:

    Utterly offtopic - but there is 25% off Interrail tickets if you buy them before 9am tomorrow and you can get a full refund any time in the next 11 months if you don't use them

    https://allaboard.eu/interrail

    Can't work out if we are going to travel down to Portugal or Southern Italy now but it should be a fun holiday..

    From the website:
    "Only European residents can travel with an Interrail Pass"

    Er... I hesitate to ask but does that include Brits these days?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 36,410
    malcolmg said:

    Eabhal said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, this being a Labour government, UK unemployment continues to rise: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98nqe0m008o

    And sometimes words just fail me:

    "Annual average earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector, across the three-month period."

    Isn't it the case that public sector wages lag private sector wages - pay settlements tend to be based on historic rates of inflation. In fact, you can see that quite clearly here in Figure 4/5, with public sector wages well behind private sector during the post-COVID period: https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/bulletins/averageweeklyearningsingreatbritain/december2025
    add pension contributions , cushy number , conditions etc and it is the opposite.
    How long did you work in the public sector Malc?
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 27,507
    edited December 16
    Nigelb said:

    DavidL said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, this being a Labour government, UK unemployment continues to rise: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98nqe0m008o

    And sometimes words just fail me:

    "Annual average earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector, across the three-month period."

    What public sector wage settlements between August and October are those? I don't recall any.

    NHS medical staff got 4% this year and non-medical staff 3.6%. It was backdated to April but paid in August, so is that where the 7.6% comes from?
    I honestly don't know. I don't know anyone getting 7.6%, let alone figures that make that an average. But this is from the BBC so I presume it is official statistics.
    Reporters really should pick this up and go back to the source (which took me all of 30sec).

    .... However, the public sector annual growth rate is affected by some public sector pay rises being paid earlier in 2025 than in 2024. RTI pay data are also published and provide a provisional, timelier estimate of median pay. The two data sources generally trend well for mean total pay...

    So something of a statistical artifact from annualising quarterly pay numbers, which shot up compared with the prior year's quarter, because the early pay awards this year simply weren't in the numbers last year.

    There ought to be a corresponding drop in the next quarter, I think ?
    Good spot. Yes, the saga of "when will the pay award get signed off" is always fun.

    EDIT: I'm not sure ONS ought to be presenting those figures like that because journalists won't read the detail.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 26,204
    edited December 16

    eek said:

    Utterly offtopic - but there is 25% off Interrail tickets if you buy them before 9am tomorrow and you can get a full refund any time in the next 11 months if you don't use them

    https://allaboard.eu/interrail

    Can't work out if we are going to travel down to Portugal or Southern Italy now but it should be a fun holiday..

    From the website:
    "Only European residents can travel with an Interrail Pass"

    Er... I hesitate to ask but does that include Brits these days?
    Northern Ireland seems excluded reading it literally although assume they are in either (or both) GB or Ireland for these purposes.

    "What countries are included?
    Austria, Belgium, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Estonia, Germany, Great Britain, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Macedonia, Montenegro, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and Turkey."
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 36,410

    eek said:

    Utterly offtopic - but there is 25% off Interrail tickets if you buy them before 9am tomorrow and you can get a full refund any time in the next 11 months if you don't use them

    https://allaboard.eu/interrail

    Can't work out if we are going to travel down to Portugal or Southern Italy now but it should be a fun holiday..

    From the website:
    "Only European residents can travel with an Interrail Pass"

    Er... I hesitate to ask but does that include Brits these days?
    Northern Ireland seems excluded reading it literally although assume they are in either (or both) GB or Ireland for these purposes.

    "What countries are included?
    Austria, Belgium, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Estonia, Germany, Great Britain, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Macedonia, Montenegro, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and Turkey."
    No Ukraine? Seems harsh, though probably irrelevant atm.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 46,057
    edited December 16
    Nigelb said:

    If the BBC needs tips on how to respond to Trump's "powerhouse" lawsuit, this's should help.

    Pulitzer Prize Board members dump broad discovery demands on Trump for tax returns, psych records, and 'any' prescription meds history*
    https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/pulitzer-prize-board-members-fight-back-with-wide-ranging-discovery-demands-including-about-trump-finances/

    *He's also claiming "emotional damage"

    I assume Trump will shortly be taking out a defamation suit against the English language which through its fake conventions and accepted meanings have twisted Trump’s words to give the impression that he’s a gross, grifting, sociopathic shitstain suffering from encroaching senility, and who is not the sharpest tool in the box.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 26,204

    Good morning

    Poor economic news this morning but absolutely no surprise

    Handing huge public sector pay rises whilst at the same time clobbering business with additional taxes and awarding massive increases in the minimum wage to young workers results in devastating employment and prospects especially for the young

    Why would any business employ young workers when they can, for the same wage engage mature and experience staff

    Labour often talk about Truss, but Starmer and Reeves have done far more long term damage to the economy and it will be very difficult to reverse

    Add in the workers rights bill and the country can now see why ''Labour is not working'

    The workers rights bill has largely been fixed. 6 months before full rights kick in is fine. Day 1 was worse than 2 years, but 6 months is better than both.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 76,426

    Nigelb said:

    If the BBC needs tips on how to respond to Trump's "powerhouse" lawsuit, this's should help.

    Pulitzer Prize Board members dump broad discovery demands on Trump for tax returns, psych records, and 'any' prescription meds history*
    https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/pulitzer-prize-board-members-fight-back-with-wide-ranging-discovery-demands-including-about-trump-finances/

    *He's also claiming "emotional damage"

    I assume Trump will shortly be taking out a defamation suit against the English language which through its fake conventions and accepted meanings have twisted Trump’s words to give the impression that he’s a gross, sociopathic shitstain suffering from encroaching senility, and who is not the sharpest tool in the box.
    He is more and more showing the effects of that condition he’s absolutely not being treated for, isn’t he?
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 26,204

    Nigelb said:

    If the BBC needs tips on how to respond to Trump's "powerhouse" lawsuit, this's should help.

    Pulitzer Prize Board members dump broad discovery demands on Trump for tax returns, psych records, and 'any' prescription meds history*
    https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/pulitzer-prize-board-members-fight-back-with-wide-ranging-discovery-demands-including-about-trump-finances/

    *He's also claiming "emotional damage"

    I assume Trump will shortly be taking out a defamation suit against the English language which through its fake conventions and accepted meanings have twisted Trump’s words to give the impression that he’s a gross, grifting, sociopathic shitstain suffering from encroaching senility, and who is not the sharpest tool in the box.
    Hope you don't have any for a quick holiday to Disney or Vegas!
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 84,498
    tlg86 said:

    Nigelb said:

    DavidL said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, this being a Labour government, UK unemployment continues to rise: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98nqe0m008o

    And sometimes words just fail me:

    "Annual average earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector, across the three-month period."

    What public sector wage settlements between August and October are those? I don't recall any.

    NHS medical staff got 4% this year and non-medical staff 3.6%. It was backdated to April but paid in August, so is that where the 7.6% comes from?
    I honestly don't know. I don't know anyone getting 7.6%, let alone figures that make that an average. But this is from the BBC so I presume it is official statistics.
    Reporters really should pick this up and go back to the source (which took me all of 30sec).

    .... However, the public sector annual growth rate is affected by some public sector pay rises being paid earlier in 2025 than in 2024. RTI pay data are also published and provide a provisional, timelier estimate of median pay. The two data sources generally trend well for mean total pay...

    So something of a statistical artifact from annualising quarterly pay numbers, which shot up compared with the prior year's quarter, because the early pay awards this year simply weren't in the numbers last year.

    There ought to be a corresponding drop in the next quarter, I think ?
    Good spot. Yes, the saga of "when will the pay award get signed off" is always fun.
    As a corollary, it show the kind of damage Trump's messing with the collection and reporting of economic statistics is likely to do.

    The value of something like ONS is that they try to maintain a consistent approach, and they show their workings.
    Even if you disagree with their analyses, you're at least fairly clear how they arrived at them, and political arguments can be conducted with some agreement on the facts.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 26,204
    Ukraine starting to lose German and French voter support which is pretty concerning. I suspect we shall get a bad peace deal in 2026, which will give the global economy a temporary boost but at the expense of emboldening Putin and might is right generally.

    https://www.politico.eu/article/french-and-germans-lean-toward-dialing-back-ukraine-support-new-international-politico-poll-shows/
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 35,966
    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, this being a Labour government, UK unemployment continues to rise: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98nqe0m008o

    And sometimes words just fail me:

    "Annual average earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector, across the three-month period."

    Well at least nobody can accuse Labour of ignoring its own core supporters
    Er... Junior doctors are giving you a wave...
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 84,498

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, this being a Labour government, UK unemployment continues to rise: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98nqe0m008o

    And sometimes words just fail me:

    "Annual average earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector, across the three-month period."

    Well at least nobody can accuse Labour of ignoring its own core supporters
    Er... Junior doctors are giving you a wave...
    Oh, I think government are paying quite a lot of attention to them.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 18,672

    Ukraine starting to lose German and French voter support which is pretty concerning. I suspect we shall get a bad peace deal in 2026, which will give the global economy a temporary boost but at the expense of emboldening Putin and might is right generally.

    https://www.politico.eu/article/french-and-germans-lean-toward-dialing-back-ukraine-support-new-international-politico-poll-shows/

    I suspect that's partly because the main promotors of supporting Ukraine in the respective countries are two very unpopular politicians, Macron and Merz. Like Starmer Merz is even less popular than his predecessor.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 16,523

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, this being a Labour government, UK unemployment continues to rise: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98nqe0m008o

    And sometimes words just fail me:

    "Annual average earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector, across the three-month period."

    Well at least nobody can accuse Labour of ignoring its own core supporters
    Er... Junior doctors are giving you a wave...
    Those junior doctors who were given a massive pay rise last year?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 132,138

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, this being a Labour government, UK unemployment continues to rise: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98nqe0m008o

    And sometimes words just fail me:

    "Annual average earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector, across the three-month period."

    Well at least nobody can accuse Labour of ignoring its own core supporters
    Er... Junior doctors are giving you a wave...
    That would be the doctors getting well above average pay rises?
  • CookieCookie Posts: 16,523
    malcolmg said:

    Eabhal said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, this being a Labour government, UK unemployment continues to rise: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98nqe0m008o

    And sometimes words just fail me:

    "Annual average earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector, across the three-month period."

    Isn't it the case that public sector wages lag private sector wages - pay settlements tend to be based on historic rates of inflation. In fact, you can see that quite clearly here in Figure 4/5, with public sector wages well behind private sector during the post-COVID period: https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/bulletins/averageweeklyearningsingreatbritain/december2025
    add pension contributions , cushy number , conditions etc and it is the opposite.
    But those things don't grow at greater than the rate of the pay increase. They're just there.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 17,572
    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, this being a Labour government, UK unemployment continues to rise: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98nqe0m008o

    And sometimes words just fail me:

    "Annual average earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector, across the three-month period."

    It’s a re-balancing of long term trends. “Overall, between December 2019 and November 2023, inflation-adjusted average private sector pay grew by 2.3%, whereas public sector pay fell by 0.3%.” says https://ifs.org.uk/publications/recent-trends-public-sector-pay The 2010-9 period was even worse, with again public sector earnings falling in real terms.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 26,204

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, this being a Labour government, UK unemployment continues to rise: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98nqe0m008o

    And sometimes words just fail me:

    "Annual average earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector, across the three-month period."

    It’s a re-balancing of long term trends. “Overall, between December 2019 and November 2023, inflation-adjusted average private sector pay grew by 2.3%, whereas public sector pay fell by 0.3%.” says https://ifs.org.uk/publications/recent-trends-public-sector-pay The 2010-9 period was even worse, with again public sector earnings falling in real terms.
    No, it is a timing issue in the stats.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 26,204
    Nigelb said:

    tlg86 said:

    Nigelb said:

    DavidL said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, this being a Labour government, UK unemployment continues to rise: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98nqe0m008o

    And sometimes words just fail me:

    "Annual average earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector, across the three-month period."

    What public sector wage settlements between August and October are those? I don't recall any.

    NHS medical staff got 4% this year and non-medical staff 3.6%. It was backdated to April but paid in August, so is that where the 7.6% comes from?
    I honestly don't know. I don't know anyone getting 7.6%, let alone figures that make that an average. But this is from the BBC so I presume it is official statistics.
    Reporters really should pick this up and go back to the source (which took me all of 30sec).

    .... However, the public sector annual growth rate is affected by some public sector pay rises being paid earlier in 2025 than in 2024. RTI pay data are also published and provide a provisional, timelier estimate of median pay. The two data sources generally trend well for mean total pay...

    So something of a statistical artifact from annualising quarterly pay numbers, which shot up compared with the prior year's quarter, because the early pay awards this year simply weren't in the numbers last year.

    There ought to be a corresponding drop in the next quarter, I think ?
    Good spot. Yes, the saga of "when will the pay award get signed off" is always fun.
    As a corollary, it show the kind of damage Trump's messing with the collection and reporting of economic statistics is likely to do.

    The value of something like ONS is that they try to maintain a consistent approach, and they show their workings.
    Even if you disagree with their analyses, you're at least fairly clear how they arrived at them, and political arguments can be conducted with some agreement on the facts.
    Another thing to note from the discussion is how easily people accept stats that are fairly obviously misleading if they fit their preconceived direction of travel. We can all be guilty of that so should remember to apply the equivalent of caveat emptor when requoting stuff.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 17,572

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, this being a Labour government, UK unemployment continues to rise: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98nqe0m008o

    And sometimes words just fail me:

    "Annual average earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector, across the three-month period."

    It’s a re-balancing of long term trends. “Overall, between December 2019 and November 2023, inflation-adjusted average private sector pay grew by 2.3%, whereas public sector pay fell by 0.3%.” says https://ifs.org.uk/publications/recent-trends-public-sector-pay The 2010-9 period was even worse, with again public sector earnings falling in real terms.
    No, it is a timing issue in the stats.
    It’s both.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 45,485
    FF43 said:

    DavidL said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, this being a Labour government, UK unemployment continues to rise: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98nqe0m008o

    And sometimes words just fail me:

    "Annual average earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector, across the three-month period."

    What public sector wage settlements between August and October are those? I don't recall any.

    NHS medical staff got 4% this year and non-medical staff 3.6%. It was backdated to April but paid in August, so is that where the 7.6% comes from?
    I honestly don't know. I don't know anyone getting 7.6%, let alone figures that make that an average. But this is from the BBC so I presume it is official statistics.
    These people reckon 3.8% public sector versus 3% private.

    https://www.theglobalrecruiter.com/public-sector-pushes-median-pay-award-above-3-per-cent/
    blows the great private paid better crap, better pay rises and vastly better pension contributions , conditions on sick pay , etc etc
  • TazTaz Posts: 23,060

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, this being a Labour government, UK unemployment continues to rise: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98nqe0m008o

    And sometimes words just fail me:

    "Annual average earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector, across the three-month period."

    Well at least nobody can accuse Labour of ignoring its own core supporters
    Er... Junior doctors are giving you a wave...
    lol

    As I forecast.

    You need this place like an alcoholic needs booze. I said you’d be back.

    Welcome back old chap.

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 45,485
    Cookie said:

    malcolmg said:

    Eabhal said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, this being a Labour government, UK unemployment continues to rise: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98nqe0m008o

    And sometimes words just fail me:

    "Annual average earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector, across the three-month period."

    Isn't it the case that public sector wages lag private sector wages - pay settlements tend to be based on historic rates of inflation. In fact, you can see that quite clearly here in Figure 4/5, with public sector wages well behind private sector during the post-COVID period: https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/bulletins/averageweeklyearningsingreatbritain/december2025
    add pension contributions , cushy number , conditions etc and it is the opposite.
    But those things don't grow at greater than the rate of the pay increase. They're just there.
    cookie, basic arithmetic , at best 8% of 3% is less than 26% of 3.8%
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 26,204

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, this being a Labour government, UK unemployment continues to rise: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98nqe0m008o

    And sometimes words just fail me:

    "Annual average earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector, across the three-month period."

    It’s a re-balancing of long term trends. “Overall, between December 2019 and November 2023, inflation-adjusted average private sector pay grew by 2.3%, whereas public sector pay fell by 0.3%.” says https://ifs.org.uk/publications/recent-trends-public-sector-pay The 2010-9 period was even worse, with again public sector earnings falling in real terms.
    No, it is a timing issue in the stats.
    It’s both.
    https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8037/

    Public sector pay rises were 4.75-6% not 7.6%. They happened earlier.

    "In July 2024, the Labour government accepted the recommendations of the Pay Review Bodies (PRBs), meaning that public sector employees will receive a pay increase of between 4.75% and 6% in the 2024/25 financial year, depending on occupation.

    In the Autumn Budget 2024 policy paper, the government said it had started the PRB process three months earlier in the year than for 2024/25"
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 132,138
    edited December 16
    FF43 said:

    Ukraine starting to lose German and French voter support which is pretty concerning. I suspect we shall get a bad peace deal in 2026, which will give the global economy a temporary boost but at the expense of emboldening Putin and might is right generally.

    https://www.politico.eu/article/french-and-germans-lean-toward-dialing-back-ukraine-support-new-international-politico-poll-shows/

    I suspect that's partly because the main promotors of supporting Ukraine in the respective countries are two very unpopular politicians, Macron and Merz. Like Starmer Merz is even less popular than his predecessor.
    The CDU still lead the SPD and the grand coalition parties combined lead the often pro Putin AfD and Linke and Merz is pro Zelensky so what German polls say is irrelevant as long as Merz is likely to remain chancellor
  • occasionalranteroccasionalranter Posts: 605
    edited December 16

    Good morning

    Poor economic news this morning but absolutely no surprise

    Handing huge public sector pay rises whilst at the same time clobbering business with additional taxes and awarding massive increases in the minimum wage to young workers results in devastating employment and prospects especially for the young

    Why would any business employ young workers when they can, for the same wage engage mature and experience staff

    Labour often talk about Truss, but Starmer and Reeves have done far more long term damage to the economy and it will be very difficult to reverse

    Add in the workers rights bill and the country can now see why ''Labour is not working'

    The workers rights bill has largely been fixed. 6 months before full rights kick in is fine. Day 1 was worse than 2 years, but 6 months is better than both.
    As a small employer I'm comfortable with 6 months.

    My beef is with the general disconnect between what Labour says and what Labour does. This is not a pro-business pro-growth government.

    (But it's better than the currently available alternatives, whether from Labour back benches or reform)
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 36,410

    Ukraine starting to lose German and French voter support which is pretty concerning. I suspect we shall get a bad peace deal in 2026, which will give the global economy a temporary boost but at the expense of emboldening Putin and might is right generally.

    https://www.politico.eu/article/french-and-germans-lean-toward-dialing-back-ukraine-support-new-international-politico-poll-shows/

    OTOH the US public are as strongly FOR supporting Ukraine as we are in Britain.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 26,204

    Good morning

    Poor economic news this morning but absolutely no surprise

    Handing huge public sector pay rises whilst at the same time clobbering business with additional taxes and awarding massive increases in the minimum wage to young workers results in devastating employment and prospects especially for the young

    Why would any business employ young workers when they can, for the same wage engage mature and experience staff

    Labour often talk about Truss, but Starmer and Reeves have done far more long term damage to the economy and it will be very difficult to reverse

    Add in the workers rights bill and the country can now see why ''Labour is not working'

    The workers rights bill has largely been fixed. 6 months before full rights kick in is fine. Day 1 was worse than 2 years, but 6 months is better than both.
    As a small employer I'm comfortable with 6 months.

    My beef is with the general disconnect between what Labour says and what Labour does. This is not a pro-business pro-growth government.

    (But it's better than the currently available alternatives, whether from Labour back benches or reform)
    The government is terrible at communications, merely bad at doing stuff. And yes, remarkably, still clearly better than the likely alternatives.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 45,485

    malcolmg said:

    Eabhal said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, this being a Labour government, UK unemployment continues to rise: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98nqe0m008o

    And sometimes words just fail me:

    "Annual average earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector, across the three-month period."

    Isn't it the case that public sector wages lag private sector wages - pay settlements tend to be based on historic rates of inflation. In fact, you can see that quite clearly here in Figure 4/5, with public sector wages well behind private sector during the post-COVID period: https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/bulletins/averageweeklyearningsingreatbritain/december2025
    add pension contributions , cushy number , conditions etc and it is the opposite.
    How long did you work in the public sector Malc?
    6 years Ben , and it was a wheeze , pub most days , great expenses and you had all the time in the world for your own pursuits as the time to do jobs was incredible.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 26,204

    Ukraine starting to lose German and French voter support which is pretty concerning. I suspect we shall get a bad peace deal in 2026, which will give the global economy a temporary boost but at the expense of emboldening Putin and might is right generally.

    https://www.politico.eu/article/french-and-germans-lean-toward-dialing-back-ukraine-support-new-international-politico-poll-shows/

    OTOH the US public are as strongly FOR supporting Ukraine as we are in Britain.
    If only the US were a functioning democracy, eh?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 132,138

    Ukraine starting to lose German and French voter support which is pretty concerning. I suspect we shall get a bad peace deal in 2026, which will give the global economy a temporary boost but at the expense of emboldening Putin and might is right generally.

    https://www.politico.eu/article/french-and-germans-lean-toward-dialing-back-ukraine-support-new-international-politico-poll-shows/

    We won’t, Zelensky will only accept a ceasefire on current lines and Putin will only accept a ceasefire with Russia getting given more Ukrainian territory
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 56,880

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, this being a Labour government, UK unemployment continues to rise: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98nqe0m008o

    And sometimes words just fail me:

    "Annual average earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector, across the three-month period."

    It’s a re-balancing of long term trends. “Overall, between December 2019 and November 2023, inflation-adjusted average private sector pay grew by 2.3%, whereas public sector pay fell by 0.3%.” says https://ifs.org.uk/publications/recent-trends-public-sector-pay The 2010-9 period was even worse, with again public sector earnings falling in real terms.
    Where does overtime sit in those pay numbers? How much NHS overtime was worked during Covid?
  • TazTaz Posts: 23,060

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, this being a Labour government, UK unemployment continues to rise: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98nqe0m008o

    And sometimes words just fail me:

    "Annual average earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector, across the three-month period."

    It’s a re-balancing of long term trends. “Overall, between December 2019 and November 2023, inflation-adjusted average private sector pay grew by 2.3%, whereas public sector pay fell by 0.3%.” says https://ifs.org.uk/publications/recent-trends-public-sector-pay The 2010-9 period was even worse, with again public sector earnings falling in real terms.
    No, it is a timing issue in the stats.
    It also fails to take account of the total package.

    Pay is a part of it.

    As a whole public sector get better pensions, holidays, increments and pay offs than the private sector.

    That needs factorinf too.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 26,204
    HYUFD said:

    Ukraine starting to lose German and French voter support which is pretty concerning. I suspect we shall get a bad peace deal in 2026, which will give the global economy a temporary boost but at the expense of emboldening Putin and might is right generally.

    https://www.politico.eu/article/french-and-germans-lean-toward-dialing-back-ukraine-support-new-international-politico-poll-shows/

    We won’t, Zelensky will only accept a ceasefire on current lines and Putin will only accept a ceasefire with Russia getting given more Ukrainian territory
    Buffer zone perhaps. In the last week we have seen US and Ukraine shifting positions, I'd put a deal as a 1 in 3 chance in the first quarter of next year, and 2 in 3 in 2026. Pretty sure it won't be a deal that is good for Europe as a whole in the long run, perhaps good for European leaders short term electorally though.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 132,138

    Ukraine starting to lose German and French voter support which is pretty concerning. I suspect we shall get a bad peace deal in 2026, which will give the global economy a temporary boost but at the expense of emboldening Putin and might is right generally.

    https://www.politico.eu/article/french-and-germans-lean-toward-dialing-back-ukraine-support-new-international-politico-poll-shows/

    Interestingly US voters are closer to UK and Canadian voters in wanting to maintain funds for Ukraine while French and German voters more likely to want to cut it. So if the Democrats win Congress next year and the Democrats win the White House in 2028 they will have majority support to back funding Zelensky
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 36,410
    malcolmg said:

    FF43 said:

    DavidL said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, this being a Labour government, UK unemployment continues to rise: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98nqe0m008o

    And sometimes words just fail me:

    "Annual average earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector, across the three-month period."

    What public sector wage settlements between August and October are those? I don't recall any.

    NHS medical staff got 4% this year and non-medical staff 3.6%. It was backdated to April but paid in August, so is that where the 7.6% comes from?
    I honestly don't know. I don't know anyone getting 7.6%, let alone figures that make that an average. But this is from the BBC so I presume it is official statistics.
    These people reckon 3.8% public sector versus 3% private.

    https://www.theglobalrecruiter.com/public-sector-pushes-median-pay-award-above-3-per-cent/
    blows the great private paid better crap, better pay rises and vastly better pension contributions , conditions on sick pay , etc etc
    That must be why the public sector find it so easy to recruit.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 12,143
    System said:

    It’s always the economy, stupid – politicalbetting.com

    Americans ain't buying Trump's economic spin. The % saying we're on the wrong economic track has skyrocketed since Jan from 43% to 56%.This has caused a massive shift to the left on who's trusted more on inflation: it's now Dems +4 pts vs. GOP +14 going into the 2022 midterms. pic.twitter.com/nAnn2LCRZG

    Read the full story here

    Why the surprise that “even” domestic prices rose albeit by a smaller amount?

    That’s exactly what economic theory says should happen: you take advantage of the price differential to (a) maximise profits by increasing prices; (b) increase market share vs non-domestic competitors.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 36,410
    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    Eabhal said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, this being a Labour government, UK unemployment continues to rise: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98nqe0m008o

    And sometimes words just fail me:

    "Annual average earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector, across the three-month period."

    Isn't it the case that public sector wages lag private sector wages - pay settlements tend to be based on historic rates of inflation. In fact, you can see that quite clearly here in Figure 4/5, with public sector wages well behind private sector during the post-COVID period: https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/bulletins/averageweeklyearningsingreatbritain/december2025
    add pension contributions , cushy number , conditions etc and it is the opposite.
    How long did you work in the public sector Malc?
    6 years Ben , and it was a wheeze , pub most days , great expenses and you had all the time in the world for your own pursuits as the time to do jobs was incredible.
    So why did you leave?
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 12,143
    rcs1000 said:

    One of the issues with tariffs that tends to get underplayed is that domestic firms will tend to raise their prices if foreign competitors get hit by tariffs.

    So: imagine that there are currently two suppliers of widgets, each costing $5.00, and one is domestic and the other foreign.

    Tariffs put $2 on the price of imported widgets, and so people might thing the domestic producer would now sell twice as many widgets for $5.

    What actually happens is that the domestic producer raises their price to $6.99, and -price elasticity being what it is- sells 1.5x as many widgets, but at 40% more per widget.

    That is profit maximizing behaviour for the widget manufacturer but shows up in higher prices for everyone.

    Depends on domestic capacity to scale though. My guess is the domestic producer price would settle at $6.25-6.50 not $6.99 as the profit maximising price.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 36,410
    FF43 said:

    Ukraine starting to lose German and French voter support which is pretty concerning. I suspect we shall get a bad peace deal in 2026, which will give the global economy a temporary boost but at the expense of emboldening Putin and might is right generally.

    https://www.politico.eu/article/french-and-germans-lean-toward-dialing-back-ukraine-support-new-international-politico-poll-shows/

    I suspect that's partly because the main promotors of supporting Ukraine in the respective countries are two very unpopular politicians, Macron and Merz. Like Starmer Merz is even less popular than his predecessor.
    By that logic the UK should be very anti supporting Ukraine.
  • OT rant about government meetings. I've been sent this email for a Teams call:-

    Please join the meeting 5 minutes before your allocated time of 11:15 by clicking on the link.
    ...
    Join the meeting 10 minutes before your allocated time by clicking on the link. It is important that you are ready and join on time.


    So in the course of a paragraph, they want me to join at 11.15, 11.10 and 11.05. This automatically generated nonsense must have been sent out for months if not decades with no civil servant bothering to read it.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 12,143
    Battlebus said:

    One of my favourite companies is iRobot who were the first to bring in robot cleaners. A genuinely world beating product out of MIT and I think some of them went onto Boston Robotics. To cut costs, as many leading US companies did they shipped manufacturing out to China (who replicated the technology) and the Far East. Trumps 45% tariffs have killed the company.

    *The article notes that the EU spoiled Amazon's chances to but them for $1.7bn last year. It's now worth $140mn which has saved Bezos a lot of cash.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1lr75lp239o

    Given it’s their Chinese supplier buying them I guess the Chinese will soon know the floor plan of every building they are used in…
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 36,410
    Taz said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, this being a Labour government, UK unemployment continues to rise: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98nqe0m008o

    And sometimes words just fail me:

    "Annual average earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector, across the three-month period."

    It’s a re-balancing of long term trends. “Overall, between December 2019 and November 2023, inflation-adjusted average private sector pay grew by 2.3%, whereas public sector pay fell by 0.3%.” says https://ifs.org.uk/publications/recent-trends-public-sector-pay The 2010-9 period was even worse, with again public sector earnings falling in real terms.
    No, it is a timing issue in the stats.
    It also fails to take account of the total package.

    Pay is a part of it.

    As a whole public sector get better pensions, holidays, increments and pay offs than the private sector.

    That needs factorinf too.
    Explains why people are queuing up to get into the public sector.

    Oh...
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 26,204
    Taz said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, this being a Labour government, UK unemployment continues to rise: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98nqe0m008o

    And sometimes words just fail me:

    "Annual average earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector, across the three-month period."

    It’s a re-balancing of long term trends. “Overall, between December 2019 and November 2023, inflation-adjusted average private sector pay grew by 2.3%, whereas public sector pay fell by 0.3%.” says https://ifs.org.uk/publications/recent-trends-public-sector-pay The 2010-9 period was even worse, with again public sector earnings falling in real terms.
    No, it is a timing issue in the stats.
    It also fails to take account of the total package.

    Pay is a part of it.

    As a whole public sector get better pensions, holidays, increments and pay offs than the private sector.

    That needs factorinf too.
    It is the annual change in earnings - those things change pretty slowly, and if anything whilst there still is a gap it is closing over time.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 58,791

    Battlebus said:

    One of my favourite companies is iRobot who were the first to bring in robot cleaners. A genuinely world beating product out of MIT and I think some of them went onto Boston Robotics. To cut costs, as many leading US companies did they shipped manufacturing out to China (who replicated the technology) and the Far East. Trumps 45% tariffs have killed the company.

    *The article notes that the EU spoiled Amazon's chances to but them for $1.7bn last year. It's now worth $140mn which has saved Bezos a lot of cash.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1lr75lp239o

    Given it’s their Chinese supplier buying them I guess the Chinese will soon know the floor plan of every building they are used in…
    How many more Western companies will learn the hard way, that outsourcing to China quickly leads to your IP being stolen and cut-price competition emerging from there?

    US and EU regulators also need to bear this in mind, when the Amazon buyout of Roomba was scuppered a couple of years ago.
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 7,680

    OT rant about government meetings. I've been sent this email for a Teams call:-

    Please join the meeting 5 minutes before your allocated time of 11:15 by clicking on the link.
    ...
    Join the meeting 10 minutes before your allocated time by clicking on the link. It is important that you are ready and join on time.


    So in the course of a paragraph, they want me to join at 11.15, 11.10 and 11.05. This automatically generated nonsense must have been sent out for months if not decades with no civil servant bothering to read it.

    Indeed, no civil servant will join before 11:20
  • BattlebusBattlebus Posts: 2,130

    Good morning

    Poor economic news this morning but absolutely no surprise

    Handing huge public sector pay rises whilst at the same time clobbering business with additional taxes and awarding massive increases in the minimum wage to young workers results in devastating employment and prospects especially for the young

    Why would any business employ young workers when they can, for the same wage engage mature and experience staff

    Labour often talk about Truss, but Starmer and Reeves have done far more long term damage to the economy and it will be very difficult to reverse

    Add in the workers rights bill and the country can now see why ''Labour is not working'

    The workers rights bill has largely been fixed. 6 months before full rights kick in is fine. Day 1 was worse than 2 years, but 6 months is better than both.
    Most companies I know had a 3 month/6 month trial period and a review at the end of the trial to decide if the job was working out. This should now mean the end-of-trial review will become key to any continuation of employment. Makes sense to review after 3/6 months as it minimises the damage to the company from a poor performer or those unhappy in a role.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 14,874
    HYUFD said:

    Ukraine starting to lose German and French voter support which is pretty concerning. I suspect we shall get a bad peace deal in 2026, which will give the global economy a temporary boost but at the expense of emboldening Putin and might is right generally.

    https://www.politico.eu/article/french-and-germans-lean-toward-dialing-back-ukraine-support-new-international-politico-poll-shows/

    We won’t, Zelensky will only accept a ceasefire on current lines and Putin will only accept a ceasefire with Russia getting given more Ukrainian territory
    A settlement on current lines wouldn't be good for VVP. Odessa might just make it all worth it. It was the Kulkovye Polye protests/massacre and subsequent firestorm of disinformation from both sides in 2014 that so inflamed Russian ire and germinated the conflict. Getting Katherine's city back would be the sort of sentimental symmetry that nourishes the Slavic psyche.

    I see Big Z has now given up on joining NATO so you can sort of see the hazy outlines of a deal that could emerge. Russia will need more though.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 26,204

    Battlebus said:

    One of my favourite companies is iRobot who were the first to bring in robot cleaners. A genuinely world beating product out of MIT and I think some of them went onto Boston Robotics. To cut costs, as many leading US companies did they shipped manufacturing out to China (who replicated the technology) and the Far East. Trumps 45% tariffs have killed the company.

    *The article notes that the EU spoiled Amazon's chances to but them for $1.7bn last year. It's now worth $140mn which has saved Bezos a lot of cash.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1lr75lp239o

    Given it’s their Chinese supplier buying them I guess the Chinese will soon know the floor plan of every building they are used in…
    I bought my first robot vac this year. I-Robot Roombas were demanding about a 40% premium for their brand name vs similar reviews from less established brands. Not sure they were ever well known enough to sustain that. FWIW I got a Monsga and it does the job fine for a lot less cash.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 26,204
    Battlebus said:

    Good morning

    Poor economic news this morning but absolutely no surprise

    Handing huge public sector pay rises whilst at the same time clobbering business with additional taxes and awarding massive increases in the minimum wage to young workers results in devastating employment and prospects especially for the young

    Why would any business employ young workers when they can, for the same wage engage mature and experience staff

    Labour often talk about Truss, but Starmer and Reeves have done far more long term damage to the economy and it will be very difficult to reverse

    Add in the workers rights bill and the country can now see why ''Labour is not working'

    The workers rights bill has largely been fixed. 6 months before full rights kick in is fine. Day 1 was worse than 2 years, but 6 months is better than both.
    Most companies I know had a 3 month/6 month trial period and a review at the end of the trial to decide if the job was working out. This should now mean the end-of-trial review will become key to any continuation of employment. Makes sense to review after 3/6 months as it minimises the damage to the company from a poor performer or those unhappy in a role.
    It may actually help some companies be pro-active rather than hoping they can fix mediocre employees. I've been guilty of that in the past, its hard to sack people without giving them every chance, but sometimes it is best for the business to be a bit more ruthless.

    Day 1 would have just limited employment, especially for anyone with "interesting" backgrounds and led to a surge in agency work which I don't think would have been helpful for either business or worker, just the agency.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 15,705

    malcolmg said:

    FF43 said:

    DavidL said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, this being a Labour government, UK unemployment continues to rise: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98nqe0m008o

    And sometimes words just fail me:

    "Annual average earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector, across the three-month period."

    What public sector wage settlements between August and October are those? I don't recall any.

    NHS medical staff got 4% this year and non-medical staff 3.6%. It was backdated to April but paid in August, so is that where the 7.6% comes from?
    I honestly don't know. I don't know anyone getting 7.6%, let alone figures that make that an average. But this is from the BBC so I presume it is official statistics.
    These people reckon 3.8% public sector versus 3% private.

    https://www.theglobalrecruiter.com/public-sector-pushes-median-pay-award-above-3-per-cent/
    blows the great private paid better crap, better pay rises and vastly better pension contributions , conditions on sick pay , etc etc
    That must be why the public sector find it so easy to recruit.
    I was in local Government which is different from the civil service and indeed it was my experience councils operated very differently from each other and the notion of a “local Government culture” is based on ignorance or prejudice or probably both.

    On the professional side, councils often employed younger staff, assisting them with obtaining qualifications and CPD credits (where applicable) in the knowledge, once qualified, the surveyor, solicitor or accountant would move on to a much better paying role in the private sector and the process would start anew.

    The councils paid less but provided experience which looked good on the CV and, let’s be honest, worked them hard to help them achieve their professional goals.
  • Dura_Ace said:

    HYUFD said:

    Ukraine starting to lose German and French voter support which is pretty concerning. I suspect we shall get a bad peace deal in 2026, which will give the global economy a temporary boost but at the expense of emboldening Putin and might is right generally.

    https://www.politico.eu/article/french-and-germans-lean-toward-dialing-back-ukraine-support-new-international-politico-poll-shows/

    We won’t, Zelensky will only accept a ceasefire on current lines and Putin will only accept a ceasefire with Russia getting given more Ukrainian territory
    A settlement on current lines wouldn't be good for VVP. Odessa might just make it all worth it. It was the Kulkovye Polye protests/massacre and subsequent firestorm of disinformation from both sides in 2014 that so inflamed Russian ire and germinated the conflict. Getting Katherine's city back would be the sort of sentimental symmetry that nourishes the Slavic psyche.

    I see Big Z has now given up on joining NATO so you can sort of see the hazy outlines of a deal that could emerge. Russia will need more though.
    It does not help using Z to mean Zelensky while Russian advocates use Z to mean their SMO.

    They need to get back to selling Russian oil pipelined (at a commission) through Ukraine. Currently no-one can buy or reliably deliver the stuff owing to American secondary sanctions and Ukrainian explosives, so this is probably the economic win-win both sides need once the face-saving part has been agreed.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 9,256
    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    Eabhal said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, this being a Labour government, UK unemployment continues to rise: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98nqe0m008o

    And sometimes words just fail me:

    "Annual average earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector, across the three-month period."

    Isn't it the case that public sector wages lag private sector wages - pay settlements tend to be based on historic rates of inflation. In fact, you can see that quite clearly here in Figure 4/5, with public sector wages well behind private sector during the post-COVID period: https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/bulletins/averageweeklyearningsingreatbritain/december2025
    add pension contributions , cushy number , conditions etc and it is the opposite.
    How long did you work in the public sector Malc?
    6 years Ben , and it was a wheeze , pub most days , great expenses and you had all the time in the world for your own pursuits as the time to do jobs was incredible.
    The public sector was very different in the 1950s.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 15,705

    OT rant about government meetings. I've been sent this email for a Teams call:-

    Please join the meeting 5 minutes before your allocated time of 11:15 by clicking on the link.
    ...
    Join the meeting 10 minutes before your allocated time by clicking on the link. It is important that you are ready and join on time.


    So in the course of a paragraph, they want me to join at 11.15, 11.10 and 11.05. This automatically generated nonsense must have been sent out for months if not decades with no civil servant bothering to read it.

    Indeed, no civil servant will join before 11:20
    The cheap jibe aside, one of my perennial bugbears in my local Government career was senior officers moving from meeting to meeting and often arriving late and unfocused and that applied both in the office and on Teams calls.

    Managing meetings was a perennial struggle - I acquired a bit of a reputation for being a tyrannical Chair but I always wanted a 60 minute meeting to end after 50 minutes to allow those moving to the next meeting time to move, both physically and mentally, from the one issue to the next.

    Part of what is perceived as the issue with decision making stems from this, I believe. Senior and especially middle management are overworked and become scared of taking decisions because they fear there has been inadequate discussion and the standard response is to arrange another meeting which rehashes all the old arguments wasting everyone’s time,

    Whisper it quietly, but I suspect this happens in the private sector too.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 40,108
    Dura_Ace said:

    HYUFD said:

    Ukraine starting to lose German and French voter support which is pretty concerning. I suspect we shall get a bad peace deal in 2026, which will give the global economy a temporary boost but at the expense of emboldening Putin and might is right generally.

    https://www.politico.eu/article/french-and-germans-lean-toward-dialing-back-ukraine-support-new-international-politico-poll-shows/

    We won’t, Zelensky will only accept a ceasefire on current lines and Putin will only accept a ceasefire with Russia getting given more Ukrainian territory
    A settlement on current lines wouldn't be good for VVP. Odessa might just make it all worth it. It was the Kulkovye Polye protests/massacre and subsequent firestorm of disinformation from both sides in 2014 that so inflamed Russian ire and germinated the conflict. Getting Katherine's city back would be the sort of sentimental symmetry that nourishes the Slavic psyche.

    I see Big Z has now given up on joining NATO so you can sort of see the hazy outlines of a deal that could emerge. Russia will need more though.
    Given the state of the Russian Black Sea fleet, Odessa looks unattainable.
  • stodge said:

    malcolmg said:

    FF43 said:

    DavidL said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, this being a Labour government, UK unemployment continues to rise: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98nqe0m008o

    And sometimes words just fail me:

    "Annual average earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector, across the three-month period."

    What public sector wage settlements between August and October are those? I don't recall any.

    NHS medical staff got 4% this year and non-medical staff 3.6%. It was backdated to April but paid in August, so is that where the 7.6% comes from?
    I honestly don't know. I don't know anyone getting 7.6%, let alone figures that make that an average. But this is from the BBC so I presume it is official statistics.
    These people reckon 3.8% public sector versus 3% private.

    https://www.theglobalrecruiter.com/public-sector-pushes-median-pay-award-above-3-per-cent/
    blows the great private paid better crap, better pay rises and vastly better pension contributions , conditions on sick pay , etc etc
    That must be why the public sector find it so easy to recruit.
    I was in local Government which is different from the civil service and indeed it was my experience councils operated very differently from each other and the notion of a “local Government culture” is based on ignorance or prejudice or probably both.

    On the professional side, councils often employed younger staff, assisting them with obtaining qualifications and CPD credits (where applicable) in the knowledge, once qualified, the surveyor, solicitor or accountant would move on to a much better paying role in the private sector and the process would start anew.

    The councils paid less but provided experience which looked good on the CV and, let’s be honest, worked them hard to help them achieve their professional goals.
    Certainly in the days of articles and part-time study, councils provided a route for lower-middle and working class school-leavers into the professions. Whether this is still the case or they all need to spend three years racking up huge debts to get a degree...
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 18,672

    FF43 said:

    Ukraine starting to lose German and French voter support which is pretty concerning. I suspect we shall get a bad peace deal in 2026, which will give the global economy a temporary boost but at the expense of emboldening Putin and might is right generally.

    https://www.politico.eu/article/french-and-germans-lean-toward-dialing-back-ukraine-support-new-international-politico-poll-shows/

    I suspect that's partly because the main promotors of supporting Ukraine in the respective countries are two very unpopular politicians, Macron and Merz. Like Starmer Merz is even less popular than his predecessor.
    By that logic the UK should be very anti supporting Ukraine.
    The difference is that Ukraine has cross party support in the UK - I guess we can thank Boris Johnson for that - while Merz is out on a limb. What he promotes is tainted by association.
  • stodge said:

    OT rant about government meetings. I've been sent this email for a Teams call:-

    Please join the meeting 5 minutes before your allocated time of 11:15 by clicking on the link.
    ...
    Join the meeting 10 minutes before your allocated time by clicking on the link. It is important that you are ready and join on time.


    So in the course of a paragraph, they want me to join at 11.15, 11.10 and 11.05. This automatically generated nonsense must have been sent out for months if not decades with no civil servant bothering to read it.

    Indeed, no civil servant will join before 11:20
    The cheap jibe aside, one of my perennial bugbears in my local Government career was senior officers moving from meeting to meeting and often arriving late and unfocused and that applied both in the office and on Teams calls.

    Managing meetings was a perennial struggle - I acquired a bit of a reputation for being a tyrannical Chair but I always wanted a 60 minute meeting to end after 50 minutes to allow those moving to the next meeting time to move, both physically and mentally, from the one issue to the next.

    Part of what is perceived as the issue with decision making stems from this, I believe. Senior and especially middle management are overworked and become scared of taking decisions because they fear there has been inadequate discussion and the standard response is to arrange another meeting which rehashes all the old arguments wasting everyone’s time,

    Whisper it quietly, but I suspect this happens in the private sector too.
    It was certainly the case in my part of the private sector in multinational and global companies. My boss's manager's calendar was fully coloured in with different meetings.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 12,143
    edited December 16
    Quick favour - there is an obituary for John Beddington in the Telegraph today. Would anyone who can do guest links mind send me one?

    Sorry: 25 Nov
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 26,204
    stodge said:

    OT rant about government meetings. I've been sent this email for a Teams call:-

    Please join the meeting 5 minutes before your allocated time of 11:15 by clicking on the link.
    ...
    Join the meeting 10 minutes before your allocated time by clicking on the link. It is important that you are ready and join on time.


    So in the course of a paragraph, they want me to join at 11.15, 11.10 and 11.05. This automatically generated nonsense must have been sent out for months if not decades with no civil servant bothering to read it.

    Indeed, no civil servant will join before 11:20
    The cheap jibe aside, one of my perennial bugbears in my local Government career was senior officers moving from meeting to meeting and often arriving late and unfocused and that applied both in the office and on Teams calls.

    Managing meetings was a perennial struggle - I acquired a bit of a reputation for being a tyrannical Chair but I always wanted a 60 minute meeting to end after 50 minutes to allow those moving to the next meeting time to move, both physically and mentally, from the one issue to the next.

    Part of what is perceived as the issue with decision making stems from this, I believe. Senior and especially middle management are overworked and become scared of taking decisions because they fear there has been inadequate discussion and the standard response is to arrange another meeting which rehashes all the old arguments wasting everyone’s time,

    Whisper it quietly, but I suspect this happens in the private sector too.
    Speaking of which it seems this site has still not resolved the Brexit debate, if we could just schedule another discussion for tomorrow evening* perhaps it might all finally get sorted.

    * Unfortunately I can't make it so send my apologies in advance.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 45,485

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, this being a Labour government, UK unemployment continues to rise: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98nqe0m008o

    And sometimes words just fail me:

    "Annual average earnings growth was 3.9% for the private sector and 7.6% for the public sector, across the three-month period."

    It’s a re-balancing of long term trends. “Overall, between December 2019 and November 2023, inflation-adjusted average private sector pay grew by 2.3%, whereas public sector pay fell by 0.3%.” says https://ifs.org.uk/publications/recent-trends-public-sector-pay The 2010-9 period was even worse, with again public sector earnings falling in real terms.
    Where does overtime sit in those pay numbers? How much NHS overtime was worked during Covid?
    they get paid shedloads of overtime , speciality allowances , shift , etc , etc yet they major on a doctor's first day working when they are about as much use as an ashtray on a motor bike
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,951
    stodge said:

    OT rant about government meetings. I've been sent this email for a Teams call:-

    Please join the meeting 5 minutes before your allocated time of 11:15 by clicking on the link.
    ...
    Join the meeting 10 minutes before your allocated time by clicking on the link. It is important that you are ready and join on time.


    So in the course of a paragraph, they want me to join at 11.15, 11.10 and 11.05. This automatically generated nonsense must have been sent out for months if not decades with no civil servant bothering to read it.

    Indeed, no civil servant will join before 11:20
    The cheap jibe aside, one of my perennial bugbears in my local Government career was senior officers moving from meeting to meeting and often arriving late and unfocused and that applied both in the office and on Teams calls.

    Managing meetings was a perennial struggle - I acquired a bit of a reputation for being a tyrannical Chair but I always wanted a 60 minute meeting to end after 50 minutes to allow those moving to the next meeting time to move, both physically and mentally, from the one issue to the next.

    Part of what is perceived as the issue with decision making stems from this, I believe. Senior and especially middle management are overworked and become scared of taking decisions because they fear there has been inadequate discussion and the standard response is to arrange another meeting which rehashes all the old arguments wasting everyone’s time,

    Whisper it quietly, but I suspect this happens in the private sector too.
    Tyrannical chairs are essential for any large meeting.
  • Quick favour - there is an obituary for John Beddington in the Telegraph today. Would anyone who can do guest links mind send me one?

    Sorry: 25 Nov

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/gift/0b66c02efbbe2823
  • stodge said:

    OT rant about government meetings. I've been sent this email for a Teams call:-

    Please join the meeting 5 minutes before your allocated time of 11:15 by clicking on the link.
    ...
    Join the meeting 10 minutes before your allocated time by clicking on the link. It is important that you are ready and join on time.


    So in the course of a paragraph, they want me to join at 11.15, 11.10 and 11.05. This automatically generated nonsense must have been sent out for months if not decades with no civil servant bothering to read it.

    Indeed, no civil servant will join before 11:20
    The cheap jibe aside, one of my perennial bugbears in my local Government career was senior officers moving from meeting to meeting and often arriving late and unfocused and that applied both in the office and on Teams calls.

    Managing meetings was a perennial struggle - I acquired a bit of a reputation for being a tyrannical Chair but I always wanted a 60 minute meeting to end after 50 minutes to allow those moving to the next meeting time to move, both physically and mentally, from the one issue to the next.

    Part of what is perceived as the issue with decision making stems from this, I believe. Senior and especially middle management are overworked and become scared of taking decisions because they fear there has been inadequate discussion and the standard response is to arrange another meeting which rehashes all the old arguments wasting everyone’s time,

    Whisper it quietly, but I suspect this happens in the private sector too.
    Speaking of which it seems this site has still not resolved the Brexit debate, if we could just schedule another discussion for tomorrow evening* perhaps it might all finally get sorted.

    * Unfortunately I can't make it so send my apologies in advance.
    Let's schedule it immediately after the discussions on STV/Electoral Reform and the pizza/pineapple conumndrum.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 59,290
    FPT
    Sandpit said:

    Quote of the day from SirKeir:

    "Every time I go to pull a lever, there are a whole bunch of regulations, consultations, arms-length bodies that mean the action from pulling the lever to delivery is longer than I think it ought to be"

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/2000594550599864781

    If only he was the PM with a large majority, who might be in a position to actually do something about the regulatory and bureaucratic overload?

    But he believes in the process. As do many in the government.

    See the advisor quitting because not building fish discos that don’t save fish might upset the EU somehow.


    Sir Humphrey Appleby: "We'd have to get clearances! Foreign powers, national interests. We have to consult our allies, top brass. NATO, SEATO, Moscow!"
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 26,204

    Quick favour - there is an obituary for John Beddington in the Telegraph today. Would anyone who can do guest links mind send me one?

    Sorry: 25 Nov

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/gift/0b66c02efbbe2823
    This was just a trick to flush out the idiot who paid for a Telegraph sub, right ;) ?
    The sports coverage is good for £25 a year, imo. Not principled enough to boycott them for their ridiculous "political journalism".
Sign In or Register to comment.