Forum menu
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