politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Worries about the economy at highest level since 2013

Second. Or somewhere.

Scottish Labour! ... I mean Third!

Make or buy? Who is importing their doctors?
@OECD chart https://t.co/Hwj1o5BUa9

"There is an argument that people will be less reluctant to rock the boat by voting for change at a time of uncertainty."

Unless of course the people see the EU, with its hamstrung economies, migrant crisis and inward looking inability to make decisions, as being part of the problem rather than part of the solution.

This is the opportunity for those making a positive case for leaving the EU (the Hannans and Carswells, rather than the Farages) to make their pitch to the electorate of the UK being an international power in its own right.

Casino_Royale said:

This is to do with regularly floated interest rate rises, surely? Offsetting that is low fuel prices (which everyone has noticed) but I suspect some are wondering if it's too good to be true.

Also, a lot of people where I work now 'rule out' summer holidays to anywhere like Tunisia, Egypt, Morroco, many of the Greek islands, and even Turkey.

That doesn't help contribute to people feeling optimistic.

The news from China, and the stockmarket turning into a Bear market alters perceptions too.

Time to fix the roof before the rain starts to fall.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/12126237/Law-firm-accused-British-soldier-of-Iraq-killing-that-Danes-had-already-admitted.html

The new 'enemy within'...will the government act? I'm not holding my breath

Election boom wearing out.

runnymede said:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/12126237/Law-firm-accused-British-soldier-of-Iraq-killing-that-Danes-had-already-admitted.html

The new 'enemy within'...will the government act? I'm not holding my breath

If this lawyer knew this already, surely its for the Law Society to act.. for whatever charge is appropriate

It's all going so well

NHS Wales: Waiting times worse than in England https://t.co/kOayXRzEyg https://t.co/259gdG3gTC

Innocent_Abroad said:

DavidL said:

FPT

The distortions, inaccuracies, lazy arrogance and plain stupidities in Blanchflower's piece are almost too numerous to count and yet even he despairs of the Labour leaderships understanding of economics: http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/economy/2016/01/opposing-austerity-not-enough-labour-s-leaders-need-lessons-economics-fast

I fear that this economics panel is going to prove an embarrassment for Labour.

Is his assertion that an economist can simultaneously be "honest, left-leaning and credible" inaccurate, arrogant, plain supid or all three at once? I am sure you know, David.

It is none of these but unfortunately he himself fails the first and third tests.

The man is supposed to be a labour economist who famously predicted mass unemployment as a result of austerity. Of course we got the exact opposite with a huge increase in employment, especially amongst the young and the low paid. This was very welcome but it changed the nature of the employment market reducing the average wage (since a couple of million came in at the bottom).

He says: "Since the start of the Great Recession nearly eight years ago, ordinary working people have experienced big falls in their living standards. Real wages are still down by 9 per cent since 2008 and 2.5 per cent since the coalition was formed in May 2010."

This is dishonest. As he knows very well this is not comparing like with like because the labour force has changed and become more inclusive. Those that remained in employment (the vast majority) are in fact better off and of course paying less tax. It also ignores, even on his figures, that 6.5% of that fall occurred under Labour. He then goes on to claim that:

"Too many people are constrained by not being able to get enough hours, or are stuck in temporary jobs, and that is especially true of the young whom the Tories have abandoned."

Presumably he is aware that both FT employment and youth employment are at record levels. That is supposed to be his job after all.

His viewpoint is distorted by an irrational hatred of the Tories and past mistakes. But even he despairs of the Labour leadership's beliefs and understandings.

And

BoJo EU-turn: Double blow to Brexit fight as Johnson and Gove opt to stay

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/6891299/Boris-Johnson-Michael-Gove-back-EU-Remain-campaign.html

And as we used to call it, going through a phase.

blackburn63 said:

Plato_Says said:

FFS

Brighton school children asked to choose from list of 23 terms to describe their gender - https://t.co/4x7kdtKrxL https://t.co/m6oFgYzNjo

FFS doesn't do justice to this absolute phucking nonsense, we're spending a fortune on idiots producing this rubbish.

A halfway credible and competent opposition would be making hay right now, what with the referendum, the Google tax fiasco, the pensions grab, the tax credit climbdown and so on. The government has had a very poor time of it since the election. But it is unscathed because Labour is led by a moron who surrounds himself with morons.

SouthamObserver said:

A halfway credible and competent opposition would be making hay right now, what with the referendum, the Google tax fiasco, the pensions grab, the tax credit climbdown and so on. The government has had a very poor time of it since the election. But it is unscathed because Labour is led by a moron who surrounds himself with morons.

That is the real tragedy of Corbyn. The Labour party have no time for anything other than their own feuding. Never has such a thin government majority seemed so secure.

SouthamObserver said:

A halfway credible and competent opposition would be making hay right now, what with the referendum, the Google tax fiasco, the pensions grab, the tax credit climbdown and so on. The government has had a very poor time of it since the election. But it is unscathed because Labour is led by a moron who surrounds himself with morons.

About time you put your cards on the table instead of sitting on the fence

#BunchGate is the distillation of their current idiocy.

foxinsoxuk said:

SouthamObserver said:

A halfway credible and competent opposition would be making hay right now, what with the referendum, the Google tax fiasco, the pensions grab, the tax credit climbdown and so on. The government has had a very poor time of it since the election. But it is unscathed because Labour is led by a moron who surrounds himself with morons.

That is the real tragedy of Corbyn. The Labour party have no time for anything other than their own feuding. Never has such a thin government majority seemed so secure.

@DavidL

I think all of us are prisoners of our preconceptions. Blanchflower, as a left wing economist, will tend to see things enacted by Labour governments as good, and those enacted by Conservative governments as bad. Cognitive dissonance is strong with most of us, and we all have a tendency to assume the next crisis will be exactly like the last one.

It would be darkly funny if the Government within around a year won a General Election on the premise that that the economy was doing well and a referendum on the premise that it was doing badly.

NickPalmer said:

It would be darkly funny if the Government within around a year won a General Election on the premise that that the economy was doing well and a referendum on the premise that it was doing badly.

And entirely possible.

TheScreamingEagles said:

And

BoJo EU-turn: Double blow to Brexit fight as Johnson and Gove opt to stay

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/6891299/Boris-Johnson-Michael-Gove-back-EU-Remain-campaign.html

This isn't news.

Alistair said:

I don't know Blanchflowers predictions but was his mass unemployment claim based on what Osborne said he was going to do (eliminate the deficit in a single parliament) or what he actually did ( follow Labour's spending plans)?

His prediction of five million unemployed was based on what Osborne said he was going to do, which was in fact quite close to what he did do. The slower reduction in deficit came largely as a result of the negative impact of the Euro-crisis on the UK economy.

Osborne most certainly did not follow Labour's spending plans and was opposed at each and every turn by Miliband and Balls. While Darling had a nominal objective of halving the deficit by the end of the parliament (which is what I presume you refer to), he never laid out plans to get there, and nor did his successors.

In any case, even if there was a deviation between what Osborne said he'd do and what he actually did, it doesn't go anywhere near far enough to explain the discrepancy between on the one hand Blanchflower's predictions of unemployment much worse than the 1980s, and on the other, the reality of the highest employment of all time.

Innocent_Abroad said:

david_herdson said:

Innocent_Abroad said:

DavidL said:

FPT

The distortions, inaccuracies, lazy arrogance and plain stupidities in Blanchflower's piece are almost too numerous to count and yet even he despairs of the Labour leaderships understanding of economics: http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/economy/2016/01/opposing-austerity-not-enough-labour-s-leaders-need-lessons-economics-fast

I fear that this economics panel is going to prove an embarrassment for Labour.

Is his assertion that an economist can simultaneously be "honest, left-leaning and credible" inaccurate, arrogant, plain supid or all three at once? I am sure you know, David.

Mind you, Blanchflower also claims that work makes people happy. That was never my experience of it.

He actually says "smart, left-leaning and credible".

Of course it's possible to be that. Perhaps the greatest UK economist of all time was. (It's a close-run thing between Keynes and Adam Smith as to who was the greater and a largely pointless discussion as their contributions were so immense but in such different contexts that you might as well argue as to whether Newton or Shakespeare was the greater).

Blanchflower, however, is not credible. His apocalyptic predictions for the consequences of austerity as set against the reality, combined with his overt partisanship and easily contradicted assertions e.g. the Tories want to make the poor poorer - how about the living wage, the rise in employment, the funding of schools in deprived areas etc?. But the specific cannot be used to define a generality (unless you are Blanchflower).

I hold no brief for Blanchflower.

The State clearly has far better ways of managing austerity than it did 100 years ago. When you factor in the decline in family support (compared to then) it is no small achievement. And one that Peebie libertarians might do well to ponder.

On that, I'd agree wholeheartedly.

foxinsoxuk said:

I would love to have another look at Egypt but not for a good while yet.

Well you can always come down to London and come to my exhibition of Egyptian stuff (mainly from museums near you but which you have probably never been to!)

Opens tonight, and getting rave reviews - focused on "hardworking citizens" rather than the Pharaohs as we thought that a nice angle

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/art/features/new-exhibition-transforming-the-body-in-ancient-egypt-looks-beyond-the-pharaohs-and-shines-a-light-a6828166.html

I'd a mini spat with Mr Blanchflower about this last week. He said Osborne had stopped austerity after two yrs so his prediction blah blah.

david_herdson said:

Alistair said:

I don't know Blanchflowers predictions but was his mass unemployment claim based on what Osborne said he was going to do (eliminate the deficit in a single parliament) or what he actually did ( follow Labour's spending plans)?

His prediction of five million unemployed was based on what Osborne said he was going to do, which was in fact quite close to what he did do. The slower reduction in deficit came largely as a result of the negative impact of the Euro-crisis on the UK economy.

Osborne most certainly did not follow Labour's spending plans and was opposed at each and every turn by Miliband and Balls. While Darling had a nominal objective of halving the deficit by the end of the parliament (which is what I presume you refer to), he never laid out plans to get there, and nor did his successors.

In any case, even if there was a deviation between what Osborne said he'd do and what he actually did, it doesn't go anywhere near far enough to explain the discrepancy between on the one hand Blanchflower's predictions of unemployment much worse than the 1980s, and on the other, the reality of the highest employment of all time.

richardDodd said:

It will be interesting to see if Sweden removes 80k people from its territory..

I think meaningful numbers of deportations would make a big difference to the migrant flow. You risk life and limb because you think you'll get a better life in the West. If there is a significant chance that you are risking your life to end up back where you started, then the incentive is greatly reduced.

Apparently, I blink quite a lot. Been told it's rather attractive. I assume they mean in a coquettish rather than Benny Hill way

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Sandpit, quite. Corbyn's a blight not merely upon Labour, but upon the entire body politic.

Miss Plato, I think outragephilia is the most bizarre fetish since I discovered some people are aroused by blinking.

Mr. Charles, can you reassure us this is a serious event, and not just a pyramid scheme?

Plato_Says said:

#BunchGate is the distillation of their current idiocy.

foxinsoxuk said:

SouthamObserver said:

A halfway credible and competent opposition would be making hay right now, what with the referendum, the Google tax fiasco, the pensions grab, the tax credit climbdown and so on. The government has had a very poor time of it since the election. But it is unscathed because Labour is led by a moron who surrounds himself with morons.

That is the real tragedy of Corbyn. The Labour party have no time for anything other than their own feuding. Never has such a thin government majority seemed so secure.

And yet it wasn't just the Corbynists jumping on that bandwagon (are we allowed to use 'bandwagon'?). Chukka Ummuna was just as vocal and outraged. Even Robert Peston was tweeting that Corbyn missed an opportunity in the House when he didn't pick up on "bunch" (but then maybe that's a measure of Peston's declining skills and influence).

For what it's worth, I asked my wife what she thought about Cameron using the term. In general, Jenny is well to the left of me but not particularly party political. Instinctively I think she'd be a Green although at local elections she'll vote on the merits of the individual and at national ones, competence also comes fairly strongly into play. Her thoughts were that it depended on the context in which the PM used it (she didn't see or hear PMQs), that of itself the term isn't offensive, that whether it is or not depends on the context in which it's used but that 'group' or 'collection' would have been better. So if someone with natural sympathies for the left-of-centre and for refugees in general isn't offended by the term in general, it's unlikely that Labour will gain any traction with swing voters.

The Danes confiscating property of migrants is clearly a Eff Off move. They're apparently applying Danish law to the new arrivals as they do with nationals.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/01/danish-mps-vote-seizing-valuables-refugees-160126055035636.html

The Danish parliament has passed a package of measures to deter refugees from seeking asylum, including confiscating valuables to pay for their stay, despite protests from international human rights organisations.

The measures, which include extending the reunification time period after which family members outside can rejoin refugees in the country from one year to three years, were passed by an overwhelming majority on Tuesday.

rcs1000 said:

richardDodd said:

It will be interesting to see if Sweden removes 80k people from its territory..

I think meaningful numbers of deportations would make a big difference to the migrant flow. You risk life and limb because you think you'll get a better life in the West. If there is a significant chance that you are risking your life to end up back where you started, then the incentive is greatly reduced.

Plato_Says said:

I'd a mini spat with Mr Blanchflower about this last week. He said Osborne had stopped austerity after two yrs so his prediction blah blah.

david_herdson said:

Alistair said:

I don't know Blanchflowers predictions but was his mass unemployment claim based on what Osborne said he was going to do (eliminate the deficit in a single parliament) or what he actually did ( follow Labour's spending plans)?

His prediction of five million unemployed was based on what Osborne said he was going to do, which was in fact quite close to what he did do. The slower reduction in deficit came largely as a result of the negative impact of the Euro-crisis on the UK economy.

Osborne most certainly did not follow Labour's spending plans and was opposed at each and every turn by Miliband and Balls. While Darling had a nominal objective of halving the deficit by the end of the parliament (which is what I presume you refer to), he never laid out plans to get there, and nor did his successors.

In any case, even if there was a deviation between what Osborne said he'd do and what he actually did, it doesn't go anywhere near far enough to explain the discrepancy between on the one hand Blanchflower's predictions of unemployment much worse than the 1980s, and on the other, the reality of the highest employment of all time.

But even if you accept that (and I don't), it doesn't explain why unemployment was more-or-less static during those first two years.

not_on_fire said:

Doing some modelling of Osborne's pension tax relief changes.... If the worst case scenario of abolishing salary sacrifice and restricting ta relief to 25% entails then I am looking at a £150-200k reduction in my pension pot at retirement.

It would also mean I'm subject to a 69%marginal tax rate (42% tax and NI, 9% student loan and George's 18% additional 'child benefit' tax rate too.

This is far worse than anything Brown ever did to pensions.

I wonder if there will be a big increase in the higher rate threshold in the budget as a sop?

I am in tears on your behalf. For most people a pension pot of £200K can only be dreamed of.

rcs1000 said:

richardDodd said:

It will be interesting to see if Sweden removes 80k people from its territory..

I think meaningful numbers of deportations would make a big difference to the migrant flow. You risk life and limb because you think you'll get a better life in the West. If there is a significant chance that you are risking your life to end up back where you started, then the incentive is greatly reduced.

It will be interesting to see what the proposal is as to where they should be deported to. I can see Human Rights cases clogging the system up for years.

Plato_Says said:

The Danes confiscating property of migrants is clearly a Eff Off move. They're apparently applying Danish law to the new arrivals as they do with nationals.

except they're not planning to search nationals to confiscate their valuables (As i understand it)

david_herdson said:

Plato_Says said:

I'd a mini spat with Mr Blanchflower about this last week. He said Osborne had stopped austerity after two yrs so his prediction blah blah.

david_herdson said:

Alistair said:

I don't know Blanchflowers predictions but was his mass unemployment claim based on what Osborne said he was going to do (eliminate the deficit in a single parliament) or what he actually did ( follow Labour's spending plans)?

His prediction of five million unemployed was based on what Osborne said he was going to do, which was in fact quite close to what he did do. The slower reduction in deficit came largely as a result of the negative impact of the Euro-crisis on the UK economy.

Osborne most certainly did not follow Labour's spending plans and was opposed at each and every turn by Miliband and Balls. While Darling had a nominal objective of halving the deficit by the end of the parliament (which is what I presume you refer to), he never laid out plans to get there, and nor did his successors.

In any case, even if there was a deviation between what Osborne said he'd do and what he actually did, it doesn't go anywhere near far enough to explain the discrepancy between on the one hand Blanchflower's predictions of unemployment much worse than the 1980s, and on the other, the reality of the highest employment of all time.

But even if you accept that (and I don't), it doesn't explain why unemployment was more-or-less static during those first two years.

Thanks for your kind words earlier.

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Charles, can you reassure us this is a serious event, and not just a pyramid scheme?

All donations welcome! Free entry is expensive and I'd rather allocate the funds elsewhere!

But click on the link - the picture is one of my favourite pieces: a fat Roman civil servant pretending to be a pharaoh

Morris_Dancer said:

I'm unconvinced by the article's argument.

The biggest advantage Remain has is fear of the unknown. But if the known becomes less attractive (migrant crisis, economic woe etc) then the unknown becomes less fearful.

Exactly what I wanted to say. – Cheers for providing the polite retort.

SquareRoot said:

not_on_fire said:

Doing some modelling of Osborne's pension tax relief changes.... If the worst case scenario of abolishing salary sacrifice and restricting ta relief to 25% entails then I am looking at a £150-200k reduction in my pension pot at retirement.

It would also mean I'm subject to a 69%marginal tax rate (42% tax and NI, 9% student loan and George's 18% additional 'child benefit' tax rate too.

This is far worse than anything Brown ever did to pensions.

I wonder if there will be a big increase in the higher rate threshold in the budget as a sop?

I am in tears on your behalf. For most people a pension pot of £200K can only be dreamed of.

I disagree with the % quoted too - Brown's lot brought in a marginal rate of tax of 62% from £100k as the personal allowance is withdrawn and if we add in the 9% student loan eg mentioned, then that's 71%.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Casino_Royale said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

And

BoJo EU-turn: Double blow to Brexit fight as Johnson and Gove opt to stay

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/6891299/Boris-Johnson-Michael-Gove-back-EU-Remain-campaign.html

This isn't news.

I had hoped Gove would change his mind back.

I'm a big fan of Gove generally, I said the other day he'd get my vote in a Tory leadership election

I like him and find him very interesting.

I can't deny I'm disappointed about his position on Remain although, in his case, I understand why whereas Boris has no excuse.

Not sure if this has been mentioned yet: the Challenger disaster was thirty years ago today.

The US space program never really recovered.

david_herdson said:

Plato_Says said:

#BunchGate is the distillation of their current idiocy.

foxinsoxuk said:

SouthamObserver said:

A halfway credible and competent opposition would be making hay right now, what with the referendum, the Google tax fiasco, the pensions grab, the tax credit climbdown and so on. The government has had a very poor time of it since the election. But it is unscathed because Labour is led by a moron who surrounds himself with morons.

That is the real tragedy of Corbyn. The Labour party have no time for anything other than their own feuding. Never has such a thin government majority seemed so secure.

And yet it wasn't just the Corbynists jumping on that bandwagon (are we allowed to use 'bandwagon'?). Chukka Ummuna was just as vocal and outraged. Even Robert Peston was tweeting that Corbyn missed an opportunity in the House when he didn't pick up on "bunch" (but then maybe that's a measure of Peston's declining skills and influence).

For what it's worth, I asked my wife what she thought about Cameron using the term. In general, Jenny is well to the left of me but not particularly party political. Instinctively I think she'd be a Green although at local elections she'll vote on the merits of the individual and at national ones, competence also comes fairly strongly into play. Her thoughts were that it depended on the context in which the PM used it (she didn't see or hear PMQs), that of itself the term isn't offensive, that whether it is or not depends on the context in which it's used but that 'group' or 'collection' would have been better. So if someone with natural sympathies for the left-of-centre and for refugees in general isn't offended by the term in general, it's unlikely that Labour will gain any traction with swing voters.

I have not heard it, but calling a large group of people with very different stories a "bunch of migrants" does sound pretty dismissive to me. It potentially conveys contempt for individuals living in atrocious conditions whose motivations are often complex and whose experiences are sometimes truly tragic. It sounds like Cameron was using the phrase to have a dig at Corbyn. That only works if these people are thought of as dismissible.

I am not surprised many on the left have expressed dismay and anger at the words and how they were used. I think they are absolutely genuine in doing so. This looks to me to be a case of very different world views. We are all sensitive to different things.

And one of the greatest understatements

Obviously a major malfunction.

— Stephen A Nesbitt, NASA Public Affairs Officer, live on air, just moments after the Space Shuttle Challenger exploded, 28 January 1986.

JosiasJessop said:

Not sure if this has been mentioned yet: the Challenger disaster was thirty years ago today.

The US space program never really recovered.

Casino_Royale said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Casino_Royale said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

And

BoJo EU-turn: Double blow to Brexit fight as Johnson and Gove opt to stay

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/6891299/Boris-Johnson-Michael-Gove-back-EU-Remain-campaign.html

This isn't news.

I had hoped Gove would change his mind back.

I'm a big fan of Gove generally, I said the other day he'd get my vote in a Tory leadership election

I like him and find him very interesting.

I can't deny I'm disappointed about his position on Remain although, in his case, I understand why whereas Boris has no excuse.

It must be very frustrating to sit on a selection committee, and choose an ostensibly eurosceptic candidate, who then decides that keeping in with George Osborne is more important than acting in accordance with his principles.

Sean_F said:

david_herdson said:

Plato_Says said:

#BunchGate is the distillation of their current idiocy.

foxinsoxuk said:

SouthamObserver said:

A halfway credible and competent opposition would be making hay right now, what with the referendum, the Google tax fiasco, the pensions grab, the tax credit climbdown and so on. The government has had a very poor time of it since the election. But it is unscathed because Labour is led by a moron who surrounds himself with morons.

That is the real tragedy of Corbyn. The Labour party have no time for anything other than their own feuding. Never has such a thin government majority seemed so secure.

And yet it wasn't just the Corbynists jumping on that bandwagon (are we allowed to use 'bandwagon'?). Chukka Ummuna was just as vocal and outraged. Even Robert Peston was tweeting that Corbyn missed an opportunity in the House when he didn't pick up on "bunch" (but then maybe that's a measure of Peston's declining skills and influence).

For what it's worth, I asked my wife what she thought about Cameron using the term. In general, Jenny is well to the left of me but not particularly party political. Instinctively I think she'd be a Green although at local elections she'll vote on the merits of the individual and at national ones, competence also comes fairly strongly into play. Her thoughts were that it depended on the context in which the PM used it (she didn't see or hear PMQs), that of itself the term isn't offensive, that whether it is or not depends on the context in which it's used but that 'group' or 'collection' would have been better. So if someone with natural sympathies for the left-of-centre and for refugees in general isn't offended by the term in general, it's unlikely that Labour will gain any traction with swing voters.

It shows what a pickle the Labour Right is in. The issues that they'd die in the ditch for are defending mass immigration, and supporting EU integration, neither of which put them on the right side of public opinion.

That's putting it very mildly. We even have a poster on here who thinks Transgenderism is the biggest issue of the day.

Until Labour move on from their obsession with the identity politics of the mid 60s to mid 90s, they will never regain power. The trouble is that they move in social circles of media, arts, charities, think tanks, and political researchers who all think as they do.

This week's full #bbcqt line up in Stamford, Lincolnshire: https://t.co/hnOr2doHs3