How does it feel to be running London Ernesto?
The thing that I am struggling the most with at the moment is learning Arabic. But I am slowly getting there......in sha Allah
It looks like Jeremy Hunt is planning on going ‘Full Truss’ at the budget next week and announce billions in unfunded tax cuts despite being warned by the IMF, amongst others, that this will have exactly the same effect as last time in ‘spooking the markets’
Please stop this multiple levels of economic drivel. Of course Tories are going for tax cuts - that's all they have!
The IMF is irrelevant to a sovereign issuer of its own currency like ours.
And yes it's fashionable to blame Liz Truss not having the democratic resolve to control her choices over the rather less significant markets. But it absolutely should be number one for a democratic process and future governments that might want to spend for the good of the country.
There is no such thing as unfunded tax cuts. They don't exist. A tax cut is simply more money in circulation. That's it!
We all hate the Tories but you're simply confusing how the tax system works with actual physical borrowing from a source of private money - and besides how anyone of working class outlook can talk about spooking the markets is beyond me.
(Clue all those spooked markets rectified themselves in days and could be have been quicker if the BoE had worked with Truss in the first place, and pensions had not been on ridiculous leverage. Yes and Truss is daft.)
You can still take the position that tax cuts make no sense currently though, which they don't.
I'm less involved with your usual economic lesson you like to give us all every few posts and more concerned about the definition of madness....
You know that thing about repeating the same experiment and expecting a different result?
You think that if Hunt repeats what Truss did, which it looks like he's going to ignore the warnings and do, that things will somehow miraculously turn out differently? Given that the economy is in far worse shape than it was when Mad Lizzie used us all as economic lab rats?
Talking of "drivel"...
The IMF is irrelevant to a sovereign issuer of its own currency like ours.
...having your own currency does not place a state in bubble, no matter how often you repeat that as if fact.
I’m less involved with your usual economic lesson you like to give us all every few posts and more concerned about the definition of madness….
But you're the one repeating the same economic guff - and I'd imagine my post count is way way down of yours Binners.
You think that if Hunt repeats what Truss did, which it looks like he’s going to ignore the warnings and do, that things will somehow miraculously turn out differently?
It's not even remotely the same circumstances. And if it does happen - then its another point removed from the Tories innit?
Actually Truss should have be warned by the BoE about LDIs and she wasn't. You should see the BoE squirming over that one.
I'm just saying what you're putting foward implies that future government's can't spend because of various institutions versions made-up constraints - do you realise the precedent for your man Starmer in those circumstances? It means none of the good stuff to make things better.
Something we both want.
…having your own currency does not place a state in bubble, no matter how often you repeat that as if fact
I didn't say it puts the state in a bubble. That's toss. You said that.
You got to laugh at folk that think institutions are better served to deliver your own countries democratic interests. I mean what is the point of the IMF lending the £££ UK - its own money. Lol.
Given that the economy is in far worse shape than it was when Mad Lizzie used us all as economic lab rats?
That's a Tory thing. Through and through. GDP has been flat at best for years. Interest rates were all ready going up (as per the BoE mandate) and the £ is now strong-ish against the dollar if you want metrics.
So I'd say it's pretty much on a regular Tory trajectory. Lizz Truss didn't add a whole lot of lasting damage other than a lot of fun for you lot.
I’m just saying what you’re putting foward implies that future government’s can’t spend because of various institutions versions made-up constraints
I'm not saying that at all. Theres a whole world of difference between borrowing to invest in infrasctructure, which labour are proposing, and handing a load of 'borrowed' money to your rich mates, which is what the Tory's have in mind. Would anyone bet against Hunt abolishing inheritence tax? Which only benefits the richest 3% of society, yet will take £8 billion+ a year out of any future governents coffers
But for the love of god, spare us all the usual lectures on your mad Weimar republic ideas about economics. We get that your very wedded to it and need to regularly tell us all about it. Again...
I mean what is the point of the IMF lending the £££ UK
It wouldn't. Lending would be in USD (effectively, assuming that remains the key currency SDR is pegged to).
But for the love of god, spare us all the usual lectures on your mad Weimar republic ideas about economics. We get that your very wedded to it and need to regularly tell us all about it. Again…
Because you're not being accurate.
You do know Weimar republic was debt denominated in a foreign currency don't you? And did you know we don't do that because we're on a Fiat system - where our 'debt' is issued in our currency. So we don't 'owe' anyone.
It's like 5 mins of research and I would not have to keep repeating myself.
And no, bugger off - I'm not shutting up - you get to keep filling these threads with all your guff - no one tells you to be quiet. It's the same stuff from you 10 times a day.
It wouldn’t. Lending would be in USD (effectively, assuming that remains the key currency SDR is pegged to).
Exactly you've answered your own question. We don't need to do that.
heres a whole world of difference between borrowing to invest in infrasctructure, which labour are proposing, and handing a load of ‘borrowed’ money to your rich mates, which is what the Tory’s have in mind.
We don't borrow for infrastructure - we simply spend into existence, do you genuinely think that anyone other than the state can create pounds for the goverment and the BoE - in that it needs to borrow?
But I agree with your sentiment I absolutely don't agree with Tories handing out money to rich mates. That is a logical line of argument.
NO TAX CUTS either.
We get that your very wedded to it and need to regularly tell us all about it. Again…
Unlike you who never likes to make the same point more than once?
Personally I don't think that the repetitive nature of this thread is its most interesting characteristic, but rone is hardly responsible for that.
In fact I see it as a breath of fresh air when we occasionally get away from the"Tories policies are terrible and ruining the UK, let's replace them with tory-lite policies instead" mantra.
Jesus wept.
Typical snowflake. Did someone make fun of his woke opinions?
I think Jesus wept because the guardians of this thread have momentarily lost control.
But no worries, normal service will resume no doubt and everyone can focus on how beastly the Tories all are.
We've just touched on the Lib Dems and the coalition earlier. I've just seen that Nick Cleggs annual salary at Facebook is £15 million+ a year
The price of failure dioesn't look too shabby, does it?
I'm sure Rishi will dwarf that when he moves to California in a few months
"A lamp post in Didsbury and a bunker in Croydon….."
Top!
"But any graduates under about 30, except the top earners, will pay an extra 9% tax for much of their working lives"
Our #2 son works with a chap, they both earn the same yet our son takes home a fair bit (over £200) more every month - it was only when they checked their payslips they saw why. He went to Uni, our son didn't.
"I wonder how many of these **** wits voted brexit to get rid of Muslims?"
My aged Uncle for one.
rone - your posts have become hectoring/lecturing/condescending in tone.
Repetition ad nauseum doesn't strengthen your argument; it's a disincentive to read your posts.
Unless you have background in economics, global finance or monetary policy you're the same as most contributors to STW threads - that is, a punter with an opinion.
everyone can focus on how beastly the Tories all are.
Well they are.
Remind me again tomorrow. Otherwise I'll forget.
Well its alright for you sat there on your massive throne, now that the capital city is under your jackboot
Our #2 son works with a chap, they both earn the same yet our son takes home a fair bit (over £200) more every month – it was only when they checked their payslips they saw why. He went to Uni, our son didn’t.
This is it! Your son and his pal are clearly above average earners, yet matey is in all likelihood still not even covering the interest on his loan, let alone paying off the capital. And your son will probably be years ahead in getting a house deposit together, thinking about kids, sorting out a pension, etc etc etc etc.....
Unless you have background in economics, global finance or monetary policy you’re the same as most contributors to STW threads – that is, a punter with an opinion.
Not all punters with an opinion are equal though are they. I would bet a lot of money that Rone has studied and understands economics a lot more than say Binners. And also having a background in global finance or monetary policy doesn't make your opinion more right than a punter with an opinion.
A lot of economic decisions are pretty much guesswork due to the number of factors involved but knowing how the economy works and not getting confused by fairly basic concepts such as tax seem to be above most punters with an opinion
Why don't you ask rone about the depth and breadth of his economic studies?
There is a huge difference between a person who thinks they know and one who really does know and understand.
You have your opinion.
Rone has his.
Binners has his.
I have mine.
Who is to say whose opinion is right?
It all depends whether it is opinion, i.e. on what Starmer is proposing or whether it is knowledge, i.e. MMT, how taxation is used. I would be sure that Rone's knowledge is at a high level compared to, again, say Binners just by his demonstration of a clearer understanding of how it all works
A few months back rone received some sort of new economics related qualification, he announced, but I didn't pay much attention to what it was as I have never doubted that he has a vague idea about what he is talking about.
Economics is all about priorities in my opinion, beyond mathematical calculations no one is right or wrong. The only issue that needs to be debated is what you want to achieve.
A lot of economic decisions are pretty much guesswork
True, but when your immediate predecessor tried doing the same as you're presently proposing - unfunded tax cuts - just over 12 months ago and it ended absolutely catastophically, you don't really have to be Mystic Meg to hazard a guess at how its likely to go. I'd actually trust Mystic Meg more than Jeremy Hunt when it comes to making economic decisions
This is it! Your son and his pal are clearly above average earners, yet matey is in all likelihood still not even covering the interest on his loan, let alone paying off the capital. And your son will probably be yearsahead in getting a house deposit together, thinking about kids, sorting out a pension, etc etc etc etc…..
The really fun part is that you have to earn well beyond the median salary to even start paying the loan back. I calculated mine a couple of months ago as my total student debt has increased by £10k since leaving uni and that I would need to earn £77k just to break even on covering the interest payments, let alone actually start paying it off.
Especially now for current students that have to pay it back for 40 years instead of 30, it's a graduate tax and it's a scam that it isn't badged as such.
But it's okay, Nick Clegg made an apology video.
but when your immediate predecessor tried doing the same as you’re presently proposing – unfunded tax cuts – just over 12 months ago and it ended absolutely catastophically, you don’t really have to be Mystic Meg to hazard a guess at how its likely to go
Depends, Truss's tax cuts were regressive and aimed at the already wealthy. Progressive tax cuts, ie cutting VAT or raising the taxable allowance, could have a different reaction.
Of course I think we know that the tories are likely to favour tax cuts for the rich, disguised with some crumbs from the table to the poor.
But it’s okay, Nick Clegg made an apology video.
Was it this one?
Re student loans and repayment - they dont care that you cant pay it back. The interest is just set ridiculously high to make sure you pay back as much as possible over as long as possible. Its just made up numbers.
Exactly, its a graduate tax but one that the payment threshold (27k for me, 25k for current students) starts well below the UK median wage (35k) so the argument that it should reflect the fact that you may get a better paying job is ridiculous. It's also something that is arguably baked into the higher tax threshold anyway.
Long term it'll be interesting to see the impact, between myself and my partner its £5k a year that we won't be putting into the economy.
I’d actually trust Mystic Meg more than Jeremy Hunt when it comes to making economic decisions
And she's been dead almost a year...
It goes into the part of the economy they care about - their donors pockets!!
A few months back rone received some sort of new economics related qualification
Did he get it for doing his own research 🙂
dantsw13
Full MemberRe student loans and repayment – they dont care that you cant pay it back. The interest is just set ridiculously high to make sure you pay back as much as possible over as long as possible.
You're not wrong exactly but you're thinking way too small. It's not really much to do with repayment rate, that's always a drop in the bucket. It's really about hiding a chunk of the national debt, and hiding it in the pockets of kids. It's £24bn a year that is treated as a recoverable asset, about 20% of the entire deficit which they can pretend will be repaid, knowing that it'll not be their problem when most of it is written off, because they'll be long retired. With any luck you can pin it on the other side.
The average UK student loan actually costs the taxpayer money, as confirmed by the IFS- even based on the government's own optimistic figures without challenge. The increase to the current system from the last one also cost the taxpayer money. It wasdesigned to increase the amount that was loaned, in the full expectation that it'd ultimately ensure a smaller level of repayment, because the amount of student debt in circulation is all that matters, not the repayment rate.
Needless to say this is basically a ponzi scheme, it's unsustainable and requires that you endlessly increase the actual amount of "lending" to make sure the amount of write-offs can never catch up.
Braverman looks utterly vacant and clueless sitting next to him as well. It's like she's just woken up and is trying to figure out where she is.
Most of the money borrowed by students goes to the universities and landlords, so why not just give them the money directly anyway? Because they want to pretend they're getting it back and not just increasing taxes.
rone – your posts have become hectoring/lecturing/condescending in tone.
You're entitled to your opinion of course, but I enjoy rone's contributions.
so Benton Blackpool by-election incoming
https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1762557855046025543?t=p1FswB0wKrJbr3WM1FpaNg&s=19
Personally I attach considerably less credibility to the Tory-New Labour economic consensus, and their false claims that there is no other way.
Enjoying rone’s posts is one thing; attaching economic credibility to them is very different.
Indeed, but that's not what you were complaining about.
Rones view is a theory that is not widely believed. Ask 3 economists the same question get 3 different answers
I know this is truely ironic but the continual posting of this same unproven theory over and over again gets wearisome and I now simply ignore all rones posts - which is a shame as there maybe something new in them of interest
Rones view is a theory that is not widely believed.
I am not sure that is true. The Magic Money Tree was certainly "widely believed" to be the best approach when dealing with the banking crisis or the covid pandemic.
What happened during both could also be seen as fitting with classic Keynes from my (limited) understanding
Yes. Build up a deficit during difficult times. How does that conflict with rone's comments on here?
What it does conflict with though is Sunak's and Starmer's claims of the need for balanced budgets.
Rone tells it how it is. Tories and New Labour pretend that the Magic Money Tree which they always rely on doesn't exist.
Rones view is a theory that is not widely believed.
You mean how the Tories managed to pull the wool over people's eyes daily for just about everything? Thatcher started these lies. We all believe a nasty dead Tory about public finances now?
MMT is the only economic theory or economics description that starts from the position of how does government spending work.
All the others seek to circumvent that position by fabricating the idea money is scarce and the private sector creates it.
It's not my theory either - it's backed by many professors and economists. It has a hard time because right-wingers mostly control the narrative and like Brexit and like lots of other things they want you to have less.
The body of information for it is actually extensive whereas other perspectives such as monetarism are generally not backed up with anything other than journos, MPs and economists that should know better repeating a bunch of rubbish about government spending.
I mean where do people think money comes from? A private company cannot create money - you would be locked up quicker than you can say Truss.
Look around at the state of everything and ask yourself why is it falling apart? Because society requires large deficits (i.e new money creation to work.) Because currently existing money is getting removed into wealthy pockets.
I'm entirely frustrated at the idea everyone on here wants better but quickly aligns themselves to the Sunak and Starmer position which is total bullshit.
You're never getting better things without the idea that the UK needs massive spending which will naturally enlarge the nationalal debt which you will never ever payback because it's simply a record of all government spending that may never get taxed back. That's how it works.
Every bit of MMT is provable - there is nothing mystical about it; it explained the COVID package, it explains why the inflation we had took hold and was not controlled by interest rates - it also explains why the USA is doing so well by running a large deficit now.
It's just painful to hear people say stuff about Weimar (not even the same ballpark) and pass it of as evidence whilst at the same time shooting themselves in the foot for future government spending plans.
We all hated George Osborne's position right - widely proved to be a disaster so why can't you begin to agree that Reeves and Starmer taking his position must also not be a good idea?
You don't need to be an MMT advocate to make that point. So justifying lack of spending via poorly qualified Truss arguments does no one any favours.
"Every bit of MMT is provable"
No it really is not. Its a theory. Same as other economic theories
it also explains why the USA is doing so well by running a large deficit now
The UK is not the USA, and sterling is not the dollar.
https://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/mmt/
MMT is important in understanding how a state’s economy works. But no state can, or should, stand alone.
Did he get it for doing his own research 🙂
Ha ha.
Well my research extends further than the Guardian columns that's for sure.I
(I did a University course actually.)
Always the same people that can't construct and actual argument other than stuff like this.
Sigh.
You will eventually have to agree with my position or a) society gets much worse or b) Starmer or Labour turns on the spending taps.
You can have either.
Every bit of MMT is provable”
No it really is not. Its a theory. Same as other economic theories.
No it's not - it starts from the position of describing spending as it currently happens.
Stop being ridiculous.
No other economic theory does that.
Tell me one?
The UK is not the USA, and sterling is not the dollar.
Which explains why different economic theories apply in the United States! 😂
Thatcher and Reagan never told us that!
The UK is not the USA, and sterling is not the dollar.
Really you almost had me there.
But we follow the same spending mechanism as the USA. And although we're not comparable countries in lots of ways - debt, deficit and government spending aligns closely. You know this Kelvin.
MMT describes any country that issues its own currency with a central bank.
Of course there are key differences but the USA's growth is in part due to Stephanie Kelton being on the '21 economics panel for Biden and creating much of the stimulus packages.
Correct Spending stimulus = growth.
MMT [proposes a theory that ] describes any country that issues its own currency with a central bank.
I think it's pretty aligned with mainstream economics. The only place I see it diverging is its relationship with interest rates as a policy device rather than funding Economic theory might describe something in principle, but it will fail time and again when it meets real life, and there are other ways (that don't involve raising taxes) to fund policy choices.
It is dull though if you keep bashing folks on the head with it, and I swear yo must be being paid by Richard Murphy to post his tweets on this site, its the only explanation that makes sense.
Personally I attach considerably less credibility to the Tory-New Labour economic consensus, and their false claims that there is no other way.
I'm not seeing anyone has said there is no other way.
People are pointing out issues with rones statement, from what little I understand mainly that a sovereign bank/country does not exist in isolation. I think people's bigger issue is the tone in which he responds to those challenges, which sparks the usual STW trench warfare trying to defend a black or white position by refusing to consider the possibility that the solution may lie in the various shades of grey in between.
Anyway, if we want a "rone!" thread we can go and start one, otherwise let's crack on bashing Rishi, which is much more fun.
It is dull though if you keep bashing folks on the head with it
Well you have explained it yourself why rone keeps doing that:
"I think it’s pretty aligned with mainstream economics".
And yet earlier:
"Rones view is a theory that is not widely believed".
What I find rather dull about this thread is how much endless talk there is claiming how awful the Tories are and almost never moving beyond that.
I guess that we all have our own personal preferences.
I’m not seeing anyone has said there is no other way.
The general consensus that the alternative is Rachel Reeves does precisely that.
let’s crack on bashing Rishi, which is much more fun.
As I said we all have own personal preferences - not imo. But it is obviously considerably easier than providing a credible alternative.
What I find rather dull about this thread is how much endless talk there is claiming how awful the Tories are and almost never moving beyond that.
I find your defense of the tories more than dull
Have you really not seen and understood the deliberate harm they do?
I find your defense of the tories more than dull
LOL! Is that what I do by not ranting daily how much I despise all Tories?!?😂
It really is getting forever harder to have an intelligent discussion on STW political threads.
They appear to be nothing more than daily reaffirmation exercises for those who feel insecure about their own personal beliefs.
Of course there are key differences but the USA’s growth is in part due to Stephanie Kelton being on the ’21 economics panel for Biden and creating much of the stimulus packages
Some economists are warning of a new US banking crisis. Alternate application of QE and QT (tightening) and the ending of the Bank Term Funding Program (BTFP) a year after it was started in response to problems at the Silicon Valley Bank, amongst others, will lead to an interesting ride for everyone https://theconversation.com/why-economists-are-warning-of-another-us-banking-crisis-224092
What I find rather dull about this thread is how much endless talk there is claiming how awful the Tories are and almost never moving beyond that.
Says the man who monopolizes an entire thread to talk about how awful Starmer is and never moves beyond that. Pot... Kettle...something something
The big problem with classic economists is that no 2 agree on anything, collectively they manage to predict the next great recession every hour of every day. Inevitably in amongst all of the guff, something eventually proves correct.
Part of my research looks Degrowth economics, and find the MMT stuff really interesting. It does get a bit incessant in here, but no more so that the usual bunch of know it alls repeating their own point ad infinitum.
Well this thread has gone down a similar path.......
Alternate application of QE and QT (tightening) and the ending of the Bank Term Funding Program (BTFP) a year after it was started in response to problems at the Silicon Valley Bank
BTFP is being ended partly because banks were taking the piss and arbitraging it for profit.
What I find rather dull about this thread is how much endless talk there is claiming how awful the Tories are and almost never moving beyond that.
Maybe you should check the thread title as a rough guide to the subject matter?
Anyway Ernesto, can you please loosen your vice like grip on the capital city as Jimmy Dimly has claimed that policing your rule is getting a bit pricey?
Says the man who monopolizes an entire thread to talk about how awful Starmer is and never moves beyond that.
Only in your imaginary world mate. If Starmer is wrong on policy, or lack of policy, I will, like anyone else, express an opinion.
I certainly don't get into endless daily rants about how much I hate him and every Labour politician.
Maybe you should check the thread title as a rough guide to the subject matter?
Yeah it's about Rishi Sunak, having established that he, and all Tories politicians, are beastly, can we not move beyond that?
Yeah it’s about Rishi Sunak, having established that he, and all Tories politicians, are beastly, can we not move beyond that?
I struggle to think of anything positive to say about Sunak, and the current administration of which he is head.
But if you know of something, please do feel free to share it for discussion rather than whining about what others opinions are?
Scary stuff.
The vast majority haven’t met a Muslim, they've been brainwashed.
Scary stuff.
The only threat to to the "British way of life" is the ****ing tory party and their think tanks
The vast majority haven’t met a Muslim, they’ve been brainwashed.
Even when they have, they dismiss the Muslim they meet as an outlier, and that he or she is unlike the ones they know are out there in those no-go areas they would be too afraid to ever go to.
As a German GP friend said when quoting some of his rural Cambridgeshire patients in 2016, “oh I don’t mean nice people like you, doctor; I mean the other kind of immigrants.”
What is the British way of life and in what way are Muslims threatening it exactly?
I struggle to think of anything positive to say about Sunak, and the current administration of which he is head.
But if you know of something, please do feel free to share it for discussion rather than whining about what others opinions are?
LOL! @ "whining"! 😂
This thread is one big mega-whine!
A load of very angry middle-class middle-aged men who need to rant everyday about how much they truly hate Tories. It's almost as they feel that if they didn't that they might be mistaken for Tories.
A few seem to be in open rebellion against their Tory parents. I'm not sure what Freud would have to say about that.
No I can't think of anything positive to say about the current administration. But I realised when I was about 15 that I was unimpressed by Conservatives. HTH
What is the British way of life and in what way are Muslims threatening it exactly?
Excuse the language in these timeless lyrics.
"Today, institutions fundamental to the British system of Government are under attack
the public schools, the house of Lords, the Church of England, the holy institution of Marriage, even our magnificent police force are no longer safe from those who would undermine our society, and it's about time we said 'enough is enough' and saw a return to the traditional British values of discipline, obedience, morality and freedom.
What we want is
Freedom from the reds and the blacks and the criminals
Prostitutes, pansies and punks
Football hooligans, juvenile delinquents
Lesbians and left wing scum
Freedom from the ****s and the ****s and the unions
Freedom from the Gipsies and the Jews
Freedom from leftwing layabouts and liberals
Freedom from the likes of you"