The dark green position on growth is we dont need it. We have plenty of stuff and money. We just need to shate it equally around. Ie some folks have multiple cars. Some folk have none. Share equally and everyone has cheap access to one.
Gross oversimplification of course but thats the basis of the dark green zero growth ideal which i adhere to.
More stuff equals more pollution
So whats Mad Lizzies next move...
U-turn on the lot?
U-turn on just the benefits stuff?
Just go all in whith the initial plan and hope the threat of removing the whip works?
Noe of the options seem brilliant for her.
And whats the Tory MPs next move...
Vote against and lose the whip?
Abstain which potentially loses the vote anyway?
Hold your nose and vote for it?
Knowing you've probably got this one chance to get rid of her and potentially get someone vaguely sensible in thats not beholden to the ERG to win back voters in the next 2 years. If you've gotta wait a full year for a VONC then thats gonna be too late.
Happy days.
Truss’s economic plans have flipped how her opponents discuss the economy.
Nonsense. That flip happened long ago. She should get no credit for that. Opposition parties have been overly concentrated on being reassuring about these issues for one reason only: (to many) British people kept voting Tory because they talked the talk on this, despite their record to the contrary. Hopefully that is shifting before our eyes, and that misplaced trust is evaporating away from the Tories.
And whats the Tory MPs next move…
Vote against and lose the whip?
Unless they represent a constituency with a very large Tory majority they stand to lose a lot more that whip if they back her plans.
And she doesn't need to do a U-turn on benefits at the moment. She can just confirm that they will rise in line with inflation, which is what she is under pressure to do.
Nonsense. That flip happened long ago.
Well it's obviously not an opinion which you share with Sahil Dutta.
However less than a couple of weeks ago the Labour leader was talking about ownership reform, social infrastructure provision and redistribution.
And yet the main topics of debate currently appear to be “sound money”, currency markets and debt reduction.
I reckon Sahil Dutta makes a fair point when he suggests that there is a risk for progressives that these traditionally Conservative priorities take precedence just when the Tories are finding themselves up Shit Creek without a paddle.
Well it’s obviously not an opinion which you share with Sahil Dutta.
For sure. I don’t. And considering how often some posters been complaining about how some opposition politicians have been using this language since at least 2019, I doubt anyone else here does either.
However less than a couple of weeks ago the Labour leader was talking about ownership reform, social infrastructure provision and redistribution.
Well, there you go. First chance after Truss has become PM, and look what Labour are talking about. They were focusing on all the stuff Dutta was talking about for two years before she became leader. That’s not because of her, but because they were trying to reset the public’s negative perception of them on four big issues (handling gov finances, supporting Britain, not going back on Brexit, mistrust of the previous leader) before they could move on to starting to present the real heart of a Labour manifesto. Yes, Labour have embraced the language of sound money… but it has bugger all do to with Truss floundering around, and everything to do with why people rejected them at previous elections.
I doubt anyone else here does either.
Fairy nuff. I thought you were just giving your own personal opinion.
Launching the Northumbrian branch of the AGC....
Our motto (nicked from Yorkshire)
"Spend nowt"
More stuff equals more pollution
I don't think growth necessarily means all that much more physical stuff.
I've ordered one of those AGC t shirts. Proud to be one of the AGC scum presumably now I'm anti UK and anti patriot
I guest blame the people who keep blindy voting Conservative.
They are the last people who have a right to complain.
“vested interests dressed up as think tanks, talking heads”
Worth repeating. Accuse your opponents of your own sins. Classic stuff. Projection. Her own big lie.
I’ve ordered one of those AGC t shirts. Proud to be one of the AGC scum presumably now I’m anti UK and anti patriot
Don't fall into that political trap... It's what they want... Don't give in to blind nationalism /populism flag waving crap.
Thought this might be better than a T-shirt for some
https://shop.newsthump.com/product/anti-growth-coalition-mug/
It’s what they want…
Yeah, the trap even has “trap” written on it in crayon. Reducing inequality, greening our energy, saving public services, investing in education and training, improving public transport links, looking after the elderly properly, growing public ownership… all can help create growth… the Tories want to shrink the UK, in the name of a smaller state that abdicates responsibility for improving quality of life for all of us, and lets their sponsors get on with doing whatever they want, whatever the cost.
Well, who’d have thunk it?
If anyone wants to read an account of how gloomy the mood was at the Tory conference this CNN report is a good'un.
I've been trying to stay away from the politics.. But I accidentally watched Truss on the beeb.
Jesus she's a ****ing melty, as the Scots would say.
What the chuff is she on about?
It's almost like the pm is literally taking the piss out of the UK, whilst also charging us for it.
What the chuff is she on about?
I'm still trying to work out if she's a university robotics project been let loose for beta-testing.
Her public speaking is truly abysmal - stresses on the wrong words, punctuation is just an afterthought and you can almost see the cogs whirring as she tries to reach the next pre-programmed answer.
Her public speaking is truly awful. It really sounds like she is reading a list of completely unrelated words, with no consideration of sentence structure or their meaning.
Truss' growth is not stuff it's money/the city. That's the quick buck.
In effect she's already succeeded crash the pound city makes money. Any recovery will be touted as "biggest growth since..."
Is it just me or do her arms look disconnected from her body at times during her speech? She moves like a marionette doll - I hope someone's done an edited video with strings attached to her...
As for the whole growth thing - I think she want's to return to the 80's boom years of her hero. Whilst conveniently ignoring the bust that followed and the sharp rise in inequality whilst the investment bankers etc. were riding a wave of champagne and cocaine.
As for the whole growth thing – I think she want’s to return to the 80’s boom years of her hero.
The only growth she's interested in is that of her bank account and the wealth of her backers. Everything else is irrelevant.
Is it just me or do her arms look disconnected from her body at times during her speech? She moves like a marionette doll – I hope someone’s done an edited video with strings attached to her…
As also noted by John Crace yesterday
https://twitter.com/johnjcrace/status/1577695926205956101?s=21&t=tmbJtljgbjtvz1V0qZMECw
She frequently looked towards the wings as if begging for help and her hands chopped the air as if she was a 1960s TV puppet.
As for the whole growth thing – I think she want’s to return to the 80’s boom years of her hero
She’s not interested in anything beyond the immediate. This is just a smash and grab raid now on behalf of her and Kwasi’s dodgy backers
This is pretty good
Kelvin
But regardless of everything in your truth bomb. Truss doesn’t have a plan for growth.
I don't think other than her personal financial situation she has ANY plan whatsoever.
I mean, she didn't even have a plan to address the Tory conference (unless she had some double edged I'll just lie at interviews then reverse 180 tomorrow/later)
Pretty much EVERYTHING she has said and done since becoming PM has been something that "someone" would pay for handsomely be that fracking or crashing the UK economy with a few "perks" thrown in such as bankers bonus's and 45% rate.
Everything else seems just to be busy work for her... or just an opportunity to chuck a bit more petrol on the fire down to the timing of reversals on the "perks".
Crazylegs
The only growth she’s interested in is that of her bank account and the wealth of her backers. Everything else is irrelevant.
I'm struggling to find anything else she's said or done say's otherwise.
MattyFez
What the chuff is she on about?
It’s almost like the pm is literally taking the piss out of the UK, whilst also charging us for it.
The more she demonstrates complete lack of understanding the more the market is volatile and hedge funds make a killing.
That was very good 😀
Yeah, very good. Needs more EMF though!
[ for younger members, EMF are a band, not a ‘think tank’ or NGO ]
Truss doesn’t have a plan for growth.
I don’t think other than her personal financial situation she has ANY plan whatsoever.
So we have gone from claiming that Truss is sticking to the narrative outlined in Britannia Unchained, as well as the one from the Institute of Economic Affairs, to today claiming that she has no plan at all?
Just because you don't agree with her plan, or she is struggling to implement it, or it is likely to fail, does not mean that Truss doesn't have a plan - she very clearly has one.
And it is precisely this plan and her vision for the UK that the Anti-Truss Coalition should be drawing voters attention to.
Her plan is to trickle-up the economy to her backers - that's it.
So basically the opposite to what the Labour Party's plan should be.
This inalienable fact should be made clear to voters rather than pretend that Truss has no plan.
Instead voters are presented with the claim that both the Tories and Labour have the same basic plan and they only need to decide who is more likely to succeed in implementing it.
MoreCashThanDash
Then a lot of people need educating so that they understand what growth is and does.
but "people" don't WANT educating what "people" want is outcomes that directly affect them preferably with some meaningless infographics and a "customer journey".
To be a bit STW it's like weather forecasting.
I personally use the met office because I'm interested and it's astonishingly accurate measured as probabilities.
e.g. if they say 10% chance of rain it's correct nearly 100% of the time (that is over a period their 10% is correct) but "people" don't want that they want umbrella icons or happy looking Sun icons and they focus on the presentation layer.
When I say "people" I mean in general, including well educated and well paid people.
If anything this trend is increasing ... just to take a random example, you are reading this because your browser made a request so for this purpose completely ignoring the STW Forum software stack and software application layers, who is actually interested in HOW that request gets back to the specific browser window you issued the request to in terms of OSI protocol layers? In reality even the architect for the forum software probably doesn't care what's happening at OSI layers 1-4.
The kind of education that requires government investment so that they get better results from school, better prospects, better jobs that will boost the growth that would fund the government to invest….etc etc
Lets see if we can do a simplistic Venn diagram or Boston Square with Axes of Service/Goods and Local/Remote.(or physical/remote??)..
How does "better results at school" pan out for remote services or even remote manufacturing?
Even if we shift the local/physical then someone has to work in a Amazon type warehouse and do the physical delivery or cut your hair, drive you to a meeting etc. but should we (real question) then say having a hair cut is something that only the top n% of the UK will be able to afford?
As a point of reference I think Tony and Guy locally are £60 or something whereas my local barber is £12 so some junior stylist at Tony and guy would (unless using staff free/discount**) never be able to get a haircut where they work.
So lets expand that to barrista's or people that make sandwiches ... posh coffee place has rent, heating (maybe in reverse now) etc. then staff wages then tax/NI and the sandwich maker also pays tax/NI/travel etc. so they can never afford a coffee (unless using staff free/discount**)
** So the real question is when we combine them... how does the sandwich maker pay for a haircut at a cost that makes it possible for the junior stylist can buy a coffee on the way to work?
are presented with the claim that both the Tories and Labour have the same basic plan
By whom? No one could have followed both conferences and come away with that impression at all. So, if people are being “presented” with that claim, who by?
OSI Model and Tony & Guy in the same post.
Props!
Considering the inexplicable choice of walk on music as well, is it possible someone in her advisory team is setting her up for public humiliation? Nobody can be that lacking in foresight and common sense, surely?
Oh.
By whom?
You need to pay more attention. The Tories and the Labour Party both publicly claim that there goals are the same, whether it is the economy, climate change, NHS, transport, education, etc. Both promise a better economy and better services, the only thing that voters need to decide is which one they trust most to deliver on their promises.
For example, Starmer at the Labour Party Conference:
"We can grow the economy and raise living standards for everyone"
Truss at the Tory Party Conference:
"Growth, growth, growth"
The reality is that goals are not the same, or at least shouldn't be the same, and the goal of the Tories is to shift power and wealth in favour of the wealthy elite, whilst the goal of the Labour Party is/should be to shift power and wealth in favour of working people.
Convince voters of this inalienable fact, rather than pretend that the Tories don't know what they are doing and have no plan, and you win elections. Once the electorate become class aware the Tories have a huge problem.
intheborders
Her plan is to trickle-up the economy to her backers – that’s it.
you have to admit it's pure genius,
What's happening is a huge and short term transferral of wealth that will be paid for by the plebs for decades.
A one off grab of pensions .. speculation on the pound transferred hundreds of billions we just didn't get to cash in yet. Not only did our pensions fall in sterling but they fell again in buying power whilst kids not even born yet will be paying for this transfer of wealth for their entire lives.
Both promise a better economy and better services
Those are aims/goals, they don't have the same "plan".
For example: Labour plan to grow a state owned renewable energy supplier. Tories plan to allow (and indeed encourage with tax breaks) private companies to extract more fossil fuels from new fields, on and off land, via fracking and accelerating expansion in the North Sea. A stark difference. To pretend they are the same because both involve stimulating economic activity (growth) is disingenuous.
This is interesting, various sources claiming tax reductions don't even offset stealth increases by freezing starting and higher rate boundaries.
Unless you're hugely wealthy presumably.
Those are aims/goals, they don’t have the same “plan”.
So you agree that the aims and goals should be the same for the Tories and Labour and it's only the "plan" that is different.
It's that sort of muddled thinking and lack of class-conscious which explains why the UK Tory Party is one of the most successful political parties in the western world.
No, you claimed that certain goals were shared (improving the economy and services). Those aren't the only goals of either party, are they? If anything, they are very secondary to the main goals of the current Tory party (redistribute wealth upwards and get the state out of the way of certain industries via deregulations). I said, to those two ends, the party don't have the same plans, in response to your claim that...
Instead voters are presented with the claim that both the Tories and Labour have the same basic plan and they only need to decide who is more likely to succeed in implementing it.
They don't have the same basic plan. At all. Just because both address changes needed in terms of the economy and public services doesn't mean that they propose the same changes. They very clearly do not. And no one should pretend that they do. This "both parties are the same" lie needs to end. No one watching the two conferences would come to that conclusion. They'd only come to that conclusion by listening to people wanting that disingenuous claim to live on, for whatever ends they have. Time for that narrative to end. It is not true.
I agree with you Kelvin and fail to see where Ernie is going with this?
So Truss is planning on more immigration to drive growth
And Braverman wants to (dreams no less) reduce immigration the the low tens of thousands
Does that make her part of the anti-growth coalition?
