The chancellor claims this is an end of an era of redistribution… looks like an acceleration of redistribution to me… further faster redistribution to the most well off, leaving everyone else even worse of than before.
IFS top level appraisal… (would the unpublished OBR assessment say much the same, who knows…)
https://twitter.com/pjtheeconomist/status/1573307710023647232?s=21
For the few, not the many.
Tories win elections by convincing people that their self serving actions also benefit everyone else in the end… sunlit uplands are always just around the corner
This x 1000000
It's an eternal game of chase the dangling carrots with this government, and the British public lap it up.
****ing useless Tory ****s
https://twitter.com/ChrisGiles_/status/1573333193842892801?t=8D8WCa_38tr3XHWalhfIPA&s=09
I don’t get it, there aren’t enough high earners to swing an election, so why pander to them like this? It’s just pissing off the other 90%.
I think that's the salient question - why do they think / know that this will not harm their re election chances ?
Ineffectual opposition ?
They know that their newly won voters are firmly anti-Labour based on Brexit/immigration/race/culture war nonsense ?
They're drunk on power ?
They know they can rely on the press to get them out of just about any hole ?
Enough people just don't really care about anyone worse off than themselves ?
There's got to be something to explain why they're happy to proceed with what ordinarily would look like election suicide.
How can they announce all this, and then close parliament for three weeks? When did parliament last have a whole week of debate and scrutiny of our “winging it” government?
I think they know that post brexit Britain is stuffed so they are going full on IEA
But those clowns are on another planet
Meanwhile
https://twitter.com/paulkrugman/status/1573301206688370695?t=V-c9E6-3XoDGBATLE9nhDA&s=19
why do they think / know that this will not harm their re election chances ?
BBC have found voxpops… she’s “doing the right thing”… Labour would just give people “hand outs”. Ex mining area by the sounds of it. Cheering the redistribution to the rich.
🤷🏻♂️
One Truss fan (her self descriptor) would like to see “more help for single mothers”, as she used to be one, after the government have just said they will sanction low paid part time workers if they don’t move to full time work.
😩
It's a good job Putin is descalating and not trying to drag this war out further otherwise we'd be really stuffed 🙄
https://twitter.com/EdConwaySky/status/1573341352259108870?s=19
Yes, but also paid a lot more tax than the average earner in the first place.
Though it’s easier just to forget that isn’t it
Not forgotten, briefly I was getting into the areas where this was a consideration and then jacked it for quality of life. And while it is a point, it's's not the point right now.
The point is that if the Gov can afford to cut tax take by whatever the impact of this 1% / 5% rate cut is, then right now it makes no moral sense that any share of the saving is given to high earners at all, let alone disproportionately by giving them all the same benefit of the basic rate cut and then an extra cut later. It should all be going to the low paid.
eg (NB maths not properly worked out, just as an idea) Cut basic rate by 5% to say 30K, and increase it by 5% then from 30-47.5K. So the 50K earner is neutral more or less, gained some then gave it back. The 40K earner has had a 5% cut on 17.5K of income and a 5% increase on 10K so sees some benefit, etc.
(again, not costed properly, I don't know exactly how many are each in bracket to balance it out, but you get the gist)
BBC have found voxpops
The BBC don’t seem to have got out of sycophancy and advanced deferential mode. The interviewer on the R4 PM programme seemed to be completely oblivious to the sub sub treasury minister talking absolute *****. He it didn’t occur to him to challenge, ‘We have only been in power for two and a half weeks, therefore we can’t be blamed for that’.
Jersey, Gurnsey, Ilse of Man, Caymen Islands, Belize etc have called "Oi that's our IP"
There’s got to be something to explain why they’re happy to proceed with what ordinarily would look like election suicide.
Never under estimate the power of the Daily Mail to convince the gullible that no matter how bad the tories are it will be worse under labour.
it makes no moral sense that any share of the saving is given to high earners at all, let alone disproportionately by giving them all the same benefit of the basic rate cut and then an extra cut later. It should all be going to the low paid.
I don't think anyone is claiming that the tax changes are intended to be "morally" correct - although that moral can (as always) be viewed two ways (is taking the same from everyone "fairest" or is making sure everyone has the same amount "fairest").
The bankers bonus + the 45p rate + lower corp tax changes are intended to make the UK a more attractive place to put your highly paid banking staff. They definitely achieve this - its preferable for banks to be able to heavily weight renumeration packages towards bonuses, and its preferable for their staff to see a lower tax regime (so they will be more comfortable living here).
The modelling (by the uk gov) shows that this more attractive environment will bring in so many bankers/high paid people and reduce tax avoidence and thus drive growth by such an amount as to cancel out the loss in tax income and net out at a beneficial rate. This modelling is more debatable and has not been backed by anyone independent.
I guess reducing tax on the poorest could be viewed as more "moral" but is extremely unlikely to drive any growth. Reducing tax on the richest is fairly unlikely to drive significant growth, but thats a bet they're taking
Has anyone seen this “modelling”, or is it a hunch? I mean, London is great, but there are still plenty of reasons to choose to locate elsewhere.
Also… do we really need so much government borrowing to fund tax breaks, and to remove bank regulations designed to reduce the risk of another round of government funded bailouts, just to attract workers from abroad? Can’t they think of other ways of improving the environment in the UK for migrant workers?
I guess reducing tax on the poorest could be viewed as more “moral” but is extremely unlikely to drive any growth.
Right now I'm talking about people facing choices like heating or eating; if the state doesn't see that as a responsibility above growth then we are truly ****ed (no need to answer, obvs)
Never under estimate the power of the Daily Mail......
IME it is usually grossly overestimated and is often used as a handy way to explain poor election results.
'So there IS a magic money tree after all!': Britons respond to Chancellor's 'Emergency Budget' by sharing memes as Britain battles cost-of-living crisis.
Angry Britons have quickly waded in on the Chancellor's 'Emergency Budget' plans by sharing memes of notorious fat cats and 'magic money trees' as Britain battles a cost-of-living crisis.
The Royal College of Nursing has described the mini-budget as one that gave 'billions to bankers and nothing to nurses'.
'Bankers' bonuses were seen as emblematic of an imploding financial services industry that was fuelled by a culture based on greed and pursuit of profit at any cost.
The Daily Mail has its work cut out in convincing that the mini budget is full of great ideas if that is what they are telling their readers.
Not read the thread yet but I'd just like to add....
It's madness absolute madness.
I'm almost swayed to vote snp by this utterly shambolic asset striping nest feathering bunch of self serving jizz stains
That's the bit which doesn't add up to me; cutting tax in the hope of recuperating it through tax gains from future spending (as people have more disposable income). It's also very risky - what if the private sector decides to keep the cash? Much better to invest in something physical, IMO. Hospitals, schools, railways etc.
Also, it's juxtaposed against inflation and high interest rates, which are 'anti-spending'.
God help public sector employees, nobody else will.
it does smack of a "set up" come back Johnson all is forgiven ?
It’s easy to understand… there could be a very short period where the UK is recovering from a big fall economically, inflation is flattening, and tax take is temporarily up due to people taking their money after the tax rate is reduced. This short temporary blip could be enough to carry them through an election, after which we are properly screwed. Especially if we fall for it and vote for them again. This is all a short term gamble to win an election… and if it doesn’t work, they’ve done what their previous and future employers and backers want, and they’ll all walk away set up for life.
Who are the IEA, and who funds them? What can they do for the key members of this cabinet when they leave politics? Follow the money.
Also, it’s juxtaposed against inflation and high interest rates, which are ‘anti-spending’.
This.
You have the BoE doing one thing and the government doing another.
May as well throw a dice.
Whole thing needs rebuilding from the ground up.
Thatcher is the only pm to get re-elected after a serious recession in modern times and she had some mad Argentinian Generals to thank for that.
If the pound stays this low against the market for long then inflation won't be a blip. The cost of nearly everything you buy went up by 2% today alone.
Inflation will eventually flatten, but most Brits will, again, become and remain poorer because of the increasing disparity between most incomes and the higher cost of living. Again. Just as under the last few Conservative PMs.
Pretty much an aside and I need to check facts here but wasn't it June time this year crude oil prices dropped to pre-war levels? With the hope the lower prices would be flushed through the pumps within a month or so? But 3 months on we're still paying at least 0.50p more than we were this time last year which massively effects anyone who drives, and anything we buy that is transported by road?
Would have thought the DM readers would be up in arms about that but, shrug...
I get the anti-car faction on here but it's just inverse I'm alright jack thinking
months on we’re still paying at least 0.50p more than we were this time last year
seems about right the pound is worth 20+% less against the dollar than a year ago and oil is priced in dollars
she had some mad Argentinian Generals to thank for that.
Which she ironically supported to the 100% right up until the moment they invaded the Falklands. The death squads and brutal government repression didn't bother her and embarrassingly when the Falklands war kicked off some Argentine army officers were actually in the UK being trained by the British army.
But the right-wingers who broke away from the Labour Party to form the SDP and very effectively split the Labour vote helped her far more.
seems about right the pound is worth 20+% less against the dollar than a year ago and oil is priced in dollars
Smashing, thanks.
Now teetering on proper 'run on the pound' territory. Congrats to Liz, Kwasi and the IEA.
Thank them for more expensive fuel as above.
Dollar 1.09 I'm waiting on parity.
Shambles
£ about to drop past $1.10. I wonder if we’ll make it to parity
And what currency is oil/gas priced in again? And what does that do to energy bills?
Just askin’
So… effects of budget will be a lower pound, higher prices, higher interest rates? As every economist (professional and backchair) said it would? Easiest economic call in history. Depressing. And all to put money in the pockets of the rich. Thanks Liz and Kwasi.
Radio discussions today saying that these were the biggest tax cuts since Anthony Barber’s budget of 1972 - that didn’t work out well either.
The interviewer on the R4 PM programme seemed to be completely oblivious to the sub sub treasury minister talking absolute *****.
Is that the same one that asked the idiot to explain "very slowly and in easy to understand words" exactly what the budget would achieve? Didn't sound to deferential to me but I was jumping in and and out the van so couldn't keep a close track.
I guess reducing tax on the poorest could be viewed as more “moral” but is extremely unlikely to drive any growth
Strongly disagree. Every extra pound in the pockets of the poorest is a pound that will almost certainly get spent back into the economy. Very much different to someone on big bucks tucking it into a pension that's already bigger than they'll ever need.
Of course I would go further and actively invest in people who need it, not just give them a tax break.
But the right-wingers who broke away from the Labour Party to form the SDP and very effectively split the Labour vote helped her far more.
I thought we had to call them centrist. I got told off on hete for referring to the right of the labour party as right wingers
Its pure nonsense for the current cabal to claim there has been a culture of redistribution. Inequality in the uk has been getting worse. No redistribution has happened for a long time in the uk
Strongly disagree. Every extra pound in the pockets of the poorest is a pound that will almost certainly get spent back into the economy.
Yup, it's trickle up that works.
But of course Kwarteng will be fully aware of that. So you have assume that his real priorities are not the same as the ones which he states publicly.
Just to be clear - although linked the dollar is very much up against the Euro too.
Yesterday's budget which won't have helped is not particularly responsible for a weak pound against the dollar.
That's been happening for larger time frames - as it gains strength.
Not such a brave move when you're betting with other people's money and wellbeing. I'd be straight down the bookies if there were no consequences to me for losing.
I think the interesting numbers now will be growth and recession.
The Tories have put all their eggs in that basket. It simply can't be avoided and will be difficult for them to deflect.
£ v $ is much less relevant here as just a reflection of market speculation and could easily turn around. Don't forget shorters really do make a mess of assets in the short-term. Bear markers abound for all sorts of risk on assets.
Inflation will sort itself - economies compressing to allow a fresh bull market eventually although I'm not sure where the growth will come from to support earnings.
I do think we're in a new time frame.
It's hard to believe Corbyn would have made such a mess of the economy as the Tories. He knew to spend money to generate wealth. That's simply what state spending does.
So when the newspapers get annoyed at state spending in normal times they are ultimately cutting the blood flow from the private sector's ability to generate growth.
Like I said earlier establishment gets everything back to front in terms of operating economic levers.
The USA is currently relatively strong because of their high spending packages during covid - Biden and co have started to contract spending (apart from military) so they will eventually suffer too.
It’s hard to believe Corbyn would have made such a mess of the economy as the Tories
Setting a rather low bar for your fella there. My nan would have run the economy better, and she's dead.
One othe thing I'm hearing talk of an potential BoE emergency MPC meeting next week to raise rates again!
That would be insane. Like I said - catch up to the Fed.
The important one is saying the 'right' message though:
[url= https://i.postimg.cc/xTvb2GkV/chrome-screenshot-1664002490018.pn g" target="_blank">https://i.postimg.cc/xTvb2GkV/chrome-screenshot-1664002490018.pn g"/> [/img][/url]
Completely ignores the chaos that is unfurling and all the commentators, economists and the markets that really don't like this budget.
Setting their stall out ready for when the
potential BoE emergency MPC meeting next week to raise rates again!
happens, push the notion of rate control coming under govt influence again? What odds on a further run on Sterling on Monday morning I wonder.
The Tories have put all their eggs in that basket. It simply can’t be avoided and will be difficult for them to deflect.
Oh but they will though. They are masters of deflection, obfuscation, and down right lying.
Expect their message at the next election to be "it was Labour's fault our economic plan didn't work, they weren't patriotic enough and didn't get behind it. Oh, and they smell like wee and fund illegal Channel crossings."
This will be carried on all broadcast networks and newspapers in England, except the Guardian and Mirror.
https://twitter.com/StephanieKelton/status/1573413878414950411?t=cUBP0HUhEIo5WBrqvsBVtg&s=19
https://twitter.com/RichardJMurphy/status/1573392392585203712?t=udHAF-A_Wi-oTEeHk7BPBA&s=19
That's today. In a moment.
So if Kwertang is not reversing his tax cuts, but wants to bring down debt, then we are looking at further austerity to the tune of ~130bn ???? (Deficit at 25bn so far this year + 60bn energy freeze, his cuts £45bn..)
https://twitter.com/GeorgeWParker/status/1573391775636529152?t=o4DwecHHgFpiUXR7EEyRTw&s=19
Kwertang and Truss both know they won’t be in power when it comes time to sort out the mess they are creating. Come the general election if the media help them win they will carry on as they are. If they lose they will blame the new government and criticise everything and anything it does when it attempts to solve the problem
I don't know what the current leader of the Labour Party has to say about Kwertang's dash for growth plan but according to Hansard this what John Smith the leader of the Labour Party on the 14th Nov 1990 had to say:
There have been three phases of this sort, all of which had serious consequences.
(a) Maudling's dash for growth 1963-64 ;
(b) Barber's boom, 1972-73 ;
(c) The Lawson boom, 1986-88.
"Serious consequences" is a bit of an understatement, the results were devastating.
So Kwertang is simply repeating a Tory experiment which has been tried 3 times before, always resulted in a short boom, but also always ended in economic disaster.
Presumably he thinks "fourth time lucky". Either that or he is planning to depart riding on the crest of the wave and be long gone when everything comes crashing down, pointing an accusing finger at whoever is left to deal with the mess.
Perhaps you should look at what Starmer has said. His statement was out first thing this morning.
It so makes me laugh at the constant denigration of labour by the " lefties" on here using carefully selected quotes and stats
As for Kwertang. He is just doing his masters bidding.
It so makes me laugh at the constant denigration of labour by the ” lefties” on here using carefully selected quotes and stats
I used to laugh. I’m now finding it a bit sinister, to be honest.
Setting a rather low bar for your fella there.
Maybe so, but McDonnell would be handling all this so much better than Kwarteng or his predecessor. But can you imagine the press and media reaction if he was chancellor prompting such a negative reaction as regard gilts and currency. They would be crucifying him.
As for Kwertang. He is just doing his masters bidding.
Who is her master?
Perhaps you should look at what Starmer has said. His statement was out first thing this morning.
Yup, I had read that article in the Guardian before I posted my comment. The whole article attributes about 3 or 4 sentences to Starmer - it turns out that Starmer doesn't approve of Kwertang's mini budget, who would have thought it, eh?
Despite the headline the overwhelming bulk of the article isn't about Starmer's lazy tweet but other people's reaction to the mini budget, primarily Angela Rayner which it quotes extensively - her comments on BBC Breakfast according to the Guardian were far more detailed than any comment made by Starmer, they go beyond expressing disapproval and suggest alternative proposals.
I reckon the article quotes Rayner probably about ten or twenty times more than it does Starmer. But perhaps that's okay because Starmer believes that it isn't a pressing issue to which the public expect an immediate response from the leader of the Opposition, it can wait a few days for his speech at Party Conference, in the meantime his deputy can deal with the issue and appear on TV in front of millions.
The article also quotes the Institute for Fiscal Studies which again appears to have more to say than the leader of the Opposition, about ten times more I reckon.
Finally the Guardian article quotes my own MP the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, no surprise to learn that according to the Guardian Chris Philp has more to say about Kwertang's mini budget than the leader of the Labour Party.
But the point of my post wasn't to criticise the lack of response by Starmer to the most right-wing budget in decades, which seems to be the only thing that you were interested in TJ, it was to highlight the fact that despite Kwertang having a PhD in economic history his plan will almost certainly fail because that is what history has shown us.
To remind you:
There have been three phases of this sort, all of which had serious consequences.
(a) Maudling’s dash for growth 1963-64 ;
(b) Barber’s boom, 1972-73 ;
(c) The Lawson boom, 1986-88.
Someone else stating that not labour. Of course they are not going to say now what they will do.in two years time. No point in getting a fixed position now.
Its highly amusing how you look for and invent stuff to criticise labour
Its highly amusing how you look for and invent stuff to criticise labour
Apparently, according to the spirit-crushingly tedious monotony of our usual 5 lefties, ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING is Keir Starmers fault.
He who shall never ever be forgiven for the heinous crime of not being Jeremy Corbyn
But, just so we can request it yet again, could you try and keep it to ‘your’ thread that everybody else avoids like the plague…
Because every single ****ing politics thread ends up with you five rattling on to each other in your fantasy lefty echo chamber that is totally detached from reality, with the usual one of you telling us, yet again, how all the countries woes could be solved in a heartbeat if we just started printing more money
You’re all absolutely unhinged!
A quick reminder that this budget is positive for those earning £155K and above only. Everyone else is still being screwed over by this government. All that borrowing to give to the rich. And you can be sure these “small state” conservatives will look to restrain public service sector spending to start clawing it back… where we really need to be creating growth than benefits the population.
Is there anyone who actually believes that giving tax breaks to the rich actually generates economic growth?
It’ll improve some figures for about a year. Nothing sustainable. Or meaningful.
good for the med yacht charter businesses.
I doubt even Liz Truss believes it. What I don't get is how few people this will help, if you're going to screw the economy and crush the poor you might as well try and pick up some mid income floating voters.
if you’re going to screw the economy and crush the poor you might as well try and pick up some mid income floating voters.
The donations and "jobs" from the ultra rich are worth more than the floating voters directly. You can use the donations to run a campaign in the run up to the election to reinvent history.
Tried and tested tactic.
Its highly amusing how you look for and invent stuff to criticise labour
What invention? I haven't made any comment. The clip was posted without comment. Presumably you think that the lefties on Sky News are inventing stuff about the Labour Party, that's up to you. It's great that you find it highly amusing though.
As far as my personal opinion of Starmer is concerned I have never been more relaxed about the Labour leader and I am quite comfortable for him to remain party leader.
With the Tories constantly shooting themselves in the foot, and now this voter repellent mini budget, I am sure that even if the Labour Party had a trained chimpanzee as leader the Tories still won't win the next general election, they almost seem determined not to.
If Starmer becomes PM I don't expect him to last 5 minutes. His inaptitude and inability to grab opportunities as they present themselves as Opposition leader will surely be carried over in his new role as PM, he won't suddenly magically become everything that he isn't at the moment.
So yeah I'm much more relaxed about Starmer than I have been. But well done to you and binners TJ for focusing my personal opinion of Starmer, who I have barely mentioned, and totally ignoring all my comments concerning the mini budget. Perhaps if you want to attack my opinion of Starmer you could do it on the Starmer thread.
Any opinions on the mini budget and what Kwertang hopes to achieve TJ? You claim "He is just doing his masters bidding", who is his master?
Can someone explain to me how giving tax breaks to a very small minority will produce growth? I understand that subsidies to businesses via reducing regulations and passing the associated hidden costs such as pollution, environmental costs and reduced employment rights over to the general population may seem like it produces growth. But the tax cuts will do diddly squat for 99% of people.
It’ll improve some figures for about a year. Nothing sustainable. Or meaningful
The stamp duty thing is utter lunacy.
Average house prices went up by 15% last year, so the last part of the economy that needs any kind of stimulus is the housing market, particularly when rampant inflation is the major issue
Still… all the better for those with capital to more cheaply acquire yet more properties for our rentier economy
They’ve really given up even the slightest pretence that they give a toss about anyone other than the very richest
We’re used to that (Tories be Toryin’), but all this latest stuff is the economics of the madhouse
On top of all their Brexit shit, and the likely trade war she’s about to start with the EU, this really is going to be full on Disaster Capitalism
We’re now the European equivalent of Pinochet’s Chile. An economic experiment
What I don’t get is how few people this will help,
They would claim that the boom which this will stimulate will benefit a lot of people, for which the nation will be grateful.
If it doesn't pan out that way no big deal Labour can sort it out.
Can someone explain to me how giving tax breaks to a very small minority will produce growth?
More money slushing around stimulants economic activity? Although it's much more effective giving the extra money to poor people who aren't spending because they don't have money.
Is there anyone who actually believes that giving tax breaks to the rich actually generates economic growth?
I sort of know some people who would be classified as rich or the very rich, as you say it’s not going to generate growth, it’s a drop in the ocean to them. Their spending hasn’t contracted or changed recently and there’s only so much one can buy / spend. Minor tax breaks may make them happy as they all seem to never have enough money but they won’t be spending more
No onvention thid time Ernie but you have previou🤣
Kwerteng. I linked to a Grauniad piece earlier and its that cabal of far right loons erg brittania unchained Atlantic bridge lot.
You dont think.he is where he is on merit do you?
What he hopes to achieve is obvious. Its all laid out in that book. Enrich thebrich and turn us into a sweat shop and tax haven forvwhich he hopes to be personally rewarded
You dont think.he is where he is on merit do you?
Oh are we back to the "all Tory politicians are useless moronic idiots" argument?
Not on merit? Is it coz he's black?
Take yourself over to Wikipedia and have a look at Kwertang's academic achievements, it is frankly staggering, including king's scholar and Kennedy scholarship.
You can be clever and wrong in the same way you can be from a minority and shit on minorities. it's not that difficult.
Differnt sorts of intelligence remember. Its not a difficult concept.
and anyway i didn't say that he was thick. I asked if you thought he was there on merit. His adherence to failed dogma hardly shows clarity of thought unless you accept he is lying thrunhis teeth about what he is doing.
He is there because it suits thev agenda of those who put him there.
This is just their opening gambit, wait until their full raft of deregulation gets pushed through over the next couple of years as they know full well there is zero chance of getting back into #10 so it’s gloves off as far as they are concerned.
I am beginning to wonder if Liz Truss is a Lib Dem plant in deep cover and is working from the inside to bring down the tories for a long time.
One can only hope.
We don’t really have a government at all
They’ve outsourced all policy making to right wing thinktanks.
They’re now just the PR people who get to present it. They’re even shit at that
him saying that public sector pay rises will worsen inflation, and asks why giving a large tax cut to top earners is different.
I think one of the major headaches that this mini budget will cause the government is that it will greatly increase the likelihood of employees voting for strike action in pursuit of higher wages.
The government is going to struggle to argue that increased incomes will be bad for the economy but not if people are already wealthy.
It is also likely to greatly increase public support for strikers, which is something that they really can't afford to happen, as the economic injustice of Tory philosophy is laid bare.
It is also likely to further increase trade union membership, which is currently increasing anyway:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-60912464.amp
Union membership in the UK rose by 118,000 to 6.6 million in 2020, the fourth year in a row that it increased.
Although the Tories are on the case with further restrictions on trade unions planned.
