Forum menu
Benefits are the wrong area to look of you want to actually fix problems in society.
It's the same driver as the Tories.
The benefits 'bill' is not an issue from a finance perspective. Normal rules apply - does it create inflation? If so tax exists to curtail.
This is all about framing the Tory way of running an economy to appease the right - again.
It won't work - nothing Starmer does works in this context as you've got a bunch of farmers calling the government communist.
More to the point Starmer and Co are looking for people to attack when they're budget finally wrecks even more of the economy.
Just follow the Tory mindset.
Well, if only a million have signed it, that means the Starmer govt is more popular then, as that means fewer folks don't want this govt than at the time of the election
The big song and dance about fraudulent benefts claims doesn’t sit right with me
Labour Govts have always made a song and dance about benefit fraud, the same way they make a song and dance about strong policing. In working communities blighted with crime, it's important that folks fiddling the welfare system are exposed and caught, it's important that low level nuisance crimes are dealt with. These are the things that impact peoples lives - not farm/landowner inheritance tax changes, for instance.
After 14 years of tory rule, I doubt there is anyone on benefits who doesnt deserve to be on benefits, and have legitimately jumped through every tory ever changing set of hops in order to be eligible.
I suspect a lot of the actual figure being quoted, comes from universal credit to people who are already working but are on a smaller than they can live on wage, but also things like pensions and carers allowances.
persistent “voters are thick” theory
https://evidence.nihr.ac.uk/collection/health-information-are-you-getting-your-message-across/
In the UK, 7.1 million adults read at, or below, the level of an average 9 year old
Politicians know this, populists know it best of all. I'll just shrug at this point, TBH.
Admirable. But it won’t stop the Russian bot farms trying.
Why would they stop? The UK electorate has shown itself to be unbelievably gullible on several occasions. It doesn’t cost them anything.
For the bang per buck it’s got to be the cheapest warfare ever.
Once they have someone following one they absolutely just keep feeding them anti-immigration ,anti-starmer,anti-woke or conspiracy crap on a daily basis.
I’ve been watching the anti-immigration and tbh you just wonder what these people are on as they repost and share yet another ai picture of a flag and lion or jokes and pictures of we’re English and drink beer and eat bacon, just to keep reinforcing the narrative.
7.1 million out of 70 ish million still leaves a lot of people who can read and tbh readings old fashioned in todays tik-tok world.
We need to educate people on it and go after the bot farms harder, we just can’t go around calling everyone who falls for it stupid.
I don’t think fraud is the main thrust of this, I think they are saying the welfare bill is too high full stop.
Well for arguments sake let's say that Keir Starmer convinces Mail on Sunday readers that the "welfare bill" is too high and needs to be treated as an urgent priority, who are they going to vote for to deal with it? Labour or Tory? Or perhaps Reform UK?
I know it is fashionable on stw to dismiss voters as stupid but who the hell thinks that Labour are tougher on benefit claimants than the Tories? Are we really suggesting that the film "I, Daniel Blake" got it arse about face and the benefits regime is typically more generous under the Tories?
Rishi Sunak did an excellent job of convincing many voters that 'small boat arrivals' was a huge problem by making it a central issue in the general election. As a consequence he gave Reform UK a massive boost which resulted in the Tory vote splitting and Labour getting a historic landslide victory, which they would never have otherwise got.
Rather than focusing so much on the alleged stupidity of voters perhaps a little more attention should be given to the sometimes quite obvious stupidity of politicians.
the mainly right wing press has focused on the bad policies rather than the good ones
And this thread continues to follows that pattern.
What bad policies?
Keir Starmer convinces Mail on Sunday readers that the “welfare bill” is too high
I think you have that back to front.
I’ve not read the piece, but I suspect it’ll be more about convincing MoS readers that Labour aren’t taking their eye of the “welfare bill”, something that MoS readers are concerned about (overly to my mind… with “benefits” concerns always about working age people not retirees).
I actually agree with Rone (not all the MMT twaddle) but that tackling benefits (which are on an unsustainable trajectory) is not the right approach. If we want to bring down the welfare bill we need to realign the cost of living with real wages. We can't do that by bumping up wages (global economy) but we can do something over time about energy and housing costs.
dazh has a point, but not the whole point
And what have they had enough of BTW? Inheritance tax on farms?
IHT for farmers is one issue that needed action, but what needed more thought is a Government package of farming and food sector support. That hasn't been looked at since May under PM Sunak
Companies paying a bit more tax?
Again, more thought needed to avoid penalising their workforce
Well-off pensioners not getting a handout to pay for their energy bills?
What about the 60-ish% of poor pensioners who should claim Pension Credits and don't and who consequently won't get WFA either?
Or are they more interested in the NHS, minimum wage and other things labour have done?
Definite poor thought in these areas too
They could have done a lot more yes, but getting rid of Labour is not the answer to the problem you have identified.
They must do a lot more to support the people in need and be genuinely equitable (or whatever this Government aspires to be) before making poorly thought-through flagship announcements.They've had four years to think about this and only had to look north of the border to see Scotland promoting support for poor pensioners and bringing in WFA cuts in 12 months,
"Responsibility for the winter fuel payment was set to be transferred to the Scottish government in September and replaced with a Holyrood-managed equivalent - the Pension Age Winter Heating Payment (PAWHP). That has now been pushed back to winter 2025." https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cz9wnyp42kwo
As much as I don't like talking about brexit and think we need to get on with it, it is highly amusing seeing a load of brexit-voting rightwing types throwing their dummies out of the pram because Labour are doing what they should be in taxing the more well off and supporting the poorest through stuff like raising the minimum wage. If I was Starmer I'd be going a lot further with sweeping wealth taxes on properties and land-holdings worth more than 5 million, hiking up VAT on luxury items like sportscars etc and putting something like 50% stamp duty on second homes. Every time I see a pissed off farmer on the streets whining about Starmer it tells me he's doing what he's supposed to be doing. F*** them!
If we want to bring down the welfare bill we need to realign the cost of living with real wages.
Yes that was kinda the point I was trying to make - if 'in work benefits' are a problem, the government should be looking to remove the need for people to rely on them by decreasing the cost of living or increasing wages etc...
...which I guess they are kind of trying to do in some ways, but as always it's not simple, there's a lot of moving parts - the NI hike for employers for example might aleviate the benefit bill a bit, but it might well backfire if wages and pay rises stagnate and employers take on fewer staff as a direct result...
I'm not saying I have the answer - I don't, just musing really.
Every time I see a pissed off farmer on the streets whining about Starmer it tells me he’s doing what he’s supposed to be doing. F*** them!
Indeed. Let’s have a look at the people most angry and most vocal about the direction the Labour government is taking
Nigel Farage
Jeremy Clarkson
James Dyson
Andrew Lloyd Webber
Isabella Oakshott
Lee Anderson
Tommy Robinson
Starmer is clearly doing something right if that motley collection of ghouls is your main opposition
In the UK, 7.1 million adults read at, or below, the level of an average 9 year old
I can think of one family member that applies to. In their case, a legacy of undiagnosed dyslexia.
A low reading age doesn't make somebody stupid.
The right wing mouth pieces have really taken on-board Bannon's famous quote "Flood the zone with shit" haven't they?
I can think of one family member that applies to. In their case, a legacy of undiagnosed dyslexia.
A low reading age doesn’t make somebody stupid.
It doesn't. But at the level of a population of 65 million it has to be indicative. As well you know. But don't like to acknowledge.
Again. I feel the need to shrug.
A low reading age doesn’t make somebody stupid.
Not it doesn't...but that's Almost a different subject... We don't have low literacy levels because of dyslexia! we have low literacy levels across the population, dyslexic or otherwise. See also: critical thinking skills.
just look at the USA... Poor education is great for bad governments... Keep people angry and uneducated, and fed wave after wave of bull crap! and you can manipulate them as you please.
It doesn’t. But at the level of a population of 65 million it has to be indicative. As well you know. But don’t like to acknowledge.
Indicative of what?
Indicative of what?
Poor education standards and lack of parental/societal ambition, I'd suggest.
Also worth pointing out that with the right support and techniques, many dyslexics read at a higher standard anyway.
"keep 'em young, dumb, and full of cum"
It's the american dream, baby!
Indicative of what?
Poor education standards and lack of parental/societal ambition, I’d suggest.
Also worth pointing out that with the right support and techniques, many dyslexics read at a higher standard anyway.
All of this.
All of this.
Oh right. Not stupid, then.
So the Labour government has just announced it is going to put loads more money and emphasis onto metal health services?
The bastards!
Will nobody think of the multimillionaire landowners?!
...emphasis onto metal health services?
Did they have to steel themselves for that?
The bastards!
Ironic that they're so easily lead
Oh right. Not stupid, then.
Call it what you like. Excuse it how you like.
Everyone knows what it is.
So the Labour government has just announced it is going to put loads more money and emphasis onto metal health services?
The bastards!
So did the Tories and they were still bastards.
By the way where is this announcement. I've not seen it. Are we talking about stuff from the budget?
We always welcome some good stuff but they've made a hash of just about everything so far, so it's going to take a big turn of events to even remotely make any sort of difference to material conditions to say - poor people.
The future is BlackRock.
So the Labour government has just announced it is going to put loads more money and emphasis onto metal health services?
I suppose 4 shit/stupid things for every 1 good one (in theory) is an improvement. Still struggling to imagine what would have been different if the LibDems had won but that is what you wanted I suppose so at least you are happy, well done you.
Current macro-economic check:
The governor of the BoE (who has a history degree) is stubbornly talking down interest rate cuts (political) and driving unemployment . Kendall at exactly the same time has a knife in the back of every ****less layabout to get back to work - you bastards.
A financial institution owned by the government dictating policy? In the opposite direction.
And, our equally well-qualified Chancellor is about to impose minimum wage uptick and NI uptick (April) in a desolate economic landscape against virtually no growth. (Neither I would be against if fiscal flows from the government were high. But the NI increase is just farcical.)
But don't worry because private equity has got our back.
These are very drunk Centrists (being kind) driving this bus. The staggering thing about Centrists is their inablity to see where they are going to make an absolute mess of things despite it all being in front of them in big magnetic letters.
Coming to power and screaming about mystical black holes and milking clothes donations was a seriously bad way to wipe the slate clean and improve people's lives. But the budget was a whole new level of dumb. (For the record sod the land-owners but you have to give people something to get excited about to off-set this agro.)
I suppose we could say all farmers aren’t millionaire tax avoiders but all millionaire tax avoiders are farmers then 🙂
I think that was one of Clarksons best early top gear reviews actually where he attempted to use a Ferrari for everyday use and was one of the things that got his career going as opposed to the usual this Maestro can take 2 suitcases in the back reviews.
The shift of top gear from boringly informative to entertainment.
Well that’s it, then.
Might as well let Farage have a go.
Labour have the power to change material conditions to avert that.
The fact they didn't thake that plunge and misreprestend the government finances for politcal gain (didn't work) is on their inability to understand what feeds populism.
It's just so so stupid.
Coming to power and screaming about mystical black holes and milking clothes donations was a seriously bad way to wipe the slate clean and improve people’s lives.
I think they’ve actually made their lives harder, the black hole and the nicking the poor pensioners winter allowance whilst the injustice of inheritance tax on the poor farmers.
Unless they pull a f… great white rabbit out of the hat before election time they’re likely to be history as they have given emotive ammunition to the other sides.
They now have to overachieve to counteract that.
I think they’ve actually made their lives harder, the black hole and the nicking the poor pensioners winter allowance whilst the injustice of inheritance tax on the poor farmers.
Absolutely. Polls have born this out with most foolish honeymoon in politics I've seen.
Total mis-steps and not needed. Don't need political games when in power as such - just change stuff for the better.
The right wing mouth pieces have really taken on-board Bannon’s famous quote “Flood the zone with shit” haven’t they?
Because it works 🙂
Brexit proved it, micro targeting and flooding misinformation thru social media or any media works.
You can’t fight it with the truth as people only want to hear their own truths.
TBH they now have easy wins,drop IHT tax for everyone and give the pensioners a bung at wintertime and promote helping to support the NHS out by having private health insurance 🙂
Well, if Labour are so bad, it is only four and a half years. Someone else can have a go after that.
You realise you can be critical of Labour without wanting the tories back don't you. If you are 100% happy with Starmer government then great, some of us are not and are expressing it.
The fact they didn’t thake that plunge and misreprestend the government finances for politcal gain (didn’t work) is on their inability to understand what feeds populism.
Folk who are 'persuaded' by populism have on the whole short memories, Labour don't need to aim for these folk until the year before the next election. The 'baseline' needs sorting AKA 'inequality', and IMO that's what they should be doing for the next 3 years.
Well, if Labour are so bad, it is only four and a half years. Someone else can have a go after that.
That someone else either being the Tories or a Tory-Reform coalition.
So you are starting to understand the problem? A More in Common poll last week put Labour's level of support at 25%, which is as bad as the level of support for the Tories when Liz Truss prime minister.
However Reform UK are polling high which means that the Tory lead is only 3%, but the combined Tory-Reform share of the vote is 48% so under the current conditions a Tory-Reform coalition is perfectly feasible.
In less than five months the Labour government has become deeply unpopular, the reason for this is because they started off from a very low point - the smallest share of the vote of any governing party in living memory.
To win a second term Labour have their work cut out, in the next four years or so they will need to change people's lives in a positive and noticeable way. All the doom and gloom and talk of "tough decisions" isn't going to cut the mustard, otherwise support wouldn't now be slumping.
Most governments put up taxes when they start out. It's been seen time and time again .
The hard or unpopular decisions are often taken early whilst they have the huge majority. Again this is not new.
The difference being for this government that the expectation levels are that they now knuckle down and deliver the better country they said they could provide. In 3-4 years from now we can judge them. It's still too early
Call it what you like. Excuse it how you like.
Everyone knows what it is.
Do they? I don't think I do. What do you think it is?
Todays Torygraph reporting yet more heart-wrenching tales of the poverty inflicted on the rural poor by these monsters…
This isn't Kier, but as this is about current govt, it may as well go here...
The NAO has refused to sign off the audit for local councils. The Govts entire public financial accounts are not fit for purpose. This farce can be traced all the way back to a decision made by Eric Pickles in 2015 when he tried to open up the auditing of these records to private enterprise, and it failed, meaning that loads of councils haven't provided audited accts for years. This is the same Eric Pickles that signed off the Grenfell tower recladding and then warned the subsequent inquiry both to "not to waste his time" and then fail to accurately recall the number of deaths...
You would've thought that a man with such a stellar record would scuttle of to obscurity, but no, He was elevated by Theresa May and sits in the Lords...Rewards for failure
I'm not surprised by the reaction to the new Labour Gov, it was inevitable. 'The Papers' which for some reason a lot more people than actually buy them, listen to, are politically opposed to Labour. If they did nothing, they'd be 'sitting on their arse' if they do anything it'll whipped up into a frenzy of misinformation and bile.
Being a stoic as I can (I'm a centrist, feel free to shout). When the current Government came to power, the UK was, and is, in a shit state. Public Services are on their arse, inflation too high, national debt record breaking, growth slow, public confidence low, public anger high.
I don't recall Labour ever saying "Vote for us, it's all sunlit uplands, we'll cut crime, reduce inflation, everyone will own their own home, 1% base rate, 5% income tax and we'll do it all by the end of the week". They took stick at the time because a lot of people felt their offering was simply "look at the state of things, we can do better" or "Tory bashing" but what else could they offer? They tempered every wild idea of overnight change they could.
So they're in charge now, I think anyone who's halfway sensible would agree there were no easy options. Truss tried the full capitalist method, slash taxes, let growth fix everything and reality tore those idealisms to shreds immediately. They need to raise taxation, Sunak gave away billions in NI cuts to try to buy an election, when we just couldn't afford it. Who's paying this time? Pensioners who have decent pensions (shit), Employers (shit) and Wealthy Landowners (not shit perhaps, but badly communicated) buying farmland, or just land and calling it a farm has been a tax dodge since 1992. Yes I'm sure some family farmers who own large farms will suffer, but you might argue they're only suffering because farm land value has shot up way past the point it's a viable thing to buy just to farm, because of the people who buy up massive amounts of land to avoid inheritance tax, not to mention the subsidies the EU used to hand them just to sit on it.
So 2m have signed a petition to rerun the GE, sounds bad, but as we know, these things have a habit of becoming viral once they reach the media. 5 months ago 6.8m people voted Tory, they presumably watched the news and witnessed the state of the UK where they live and said "Yep, another 5 years and they'll have this sorted" 3.6m voted Lib Dem, 4.1m voted Reform. You've got to assume it wouldn't be hard to find 2m out of those 14m people who didn't get the Government they wanted to hit a few key strokes to say they're not happy. Especially when it's been so widely publicised.
When the next GE campaigns kick off in about 4 years, we'll know how well this current Government have done with the issues they took on, how they've delt with the ones we don't yet know about and we can all decide whether we think they've done a good job, and how much we trust them to have another 5 years.
I always thought that Pickles career ended in disgrace for historic sex offences. Was that someone else and I'm misremembering?
Was that someone else and I’m misremembering?
Yup. Not aware of any accusations against him and he retired as an MP into the house of lords.
When the next GE campaigns kick off in about 4 years, we’ll know how well this current Government have done with the issues they took on, how they’ve delt with the ones we don’t yet know about and we can all decide whether we think they’ve done a good job, and how much we trust them to have another 5 years.
Yup, that is exactly how the system works. Unfortunately it is impossible to predict the outcome. Although right now it is looking fairly good for Nigel Farage......lots of positive stuff for him both domestically and internationally - ironically particularly across the Channel in Europe.
I cannot think of a time when the stakes were higher than they are likely to be in 2029, with the real possibility of Deputy Prime Minister Farage and Reform UK in the Cabinet. What Cabinet post for Lee Anderson..... Home Secretary?
They need to raise taxation, Sunak gave away billions in NI cuts to try to buy an election, when we just couldn’t afford it. Who’s paying this time?
Total nonsense.
They do need to raise taxation but not to pay for anything.
These are Tory lies repeated over and over until every Centrist sucks them in hook, like and centre.
We have a government with a huge capacity to spend, and along with the political will and urgency - it's desperate.
The Labour party are failing this task.
Never ever forget the government spent 450bn pounds between 20/21 when the economy was more or less shutdown.
Can you not see we are going round and round with tax and spend. It doesn't work - it's an ever decreasing pot of money unless new money is created - all normal process between the BoE and government.
Tax and spend, balancing books and black-holes are the architects of austerity politics. More to the point they're all lies - bigger lies than Brexit.
There is no appetite for big taxation either - it doesn't work as a function of spending. Taxation needs separating from spending completely.
To get out of this mess the government just has to do the right thing and stop pretending that it doesn't have the fiscal fire power do it.
It's on Labour to sort this out.
Everything else is Tory lies driven by Starmer and Reeves's lack of understanding of the wider economy.
It seems to me some people would rather have a failing Labour economy than hold them to account.
I'd be surprised if they make five years in this state.
Tax and spend is required. That isn’t a “Tory lie”. And it doesn’t mean that it’s the tax taken that funds the spending. The government is spending more than it takes in as tax, and that gap is going to increase in the next few years. But if it decided to spend that much more without taxing some more, we’d all feel the consequences very quickly.
If every attempt to increase taxation, and shift who is paying tax towards the better off, is met with hyperbolic “Tory lies” complaints, then that narrative is only going to help the “small state” and “protect the rich from taxation” libertarians that’ll be chomping at the bit to take hold of public policy in the UK.
I fear many on the left have given up on the idea of redistribution of wealth and, after reading The Deficit Myth (and ONLY The Deficit Myth) have decided that the solution to everything is to print money.
I'd say a much better idea is to take the money off the super-rich and give it to people who have to choose between heating and eating.
IF Stephanie Kelton's ideas hold water then I'd argue it only applies to the US which has the luxury of controlling the world's global reserve currency.
Ultimately the world has ONE currency issuer and it is not the UK government. Even if a country prints it's own currency, it is still always going to be a currency user.
One other thing about Farage. He will most likely have had 4 years of high profile media coverage looking statesmanlike (as much as a perma-tanned conman ever could) talking to Trump. Supposedly on behalf of Britain.
The government will make the necessary noises about representatives of an elected government. Trump will ignore them and Farage will become the UK's dedicated foreign secretary to the US by proxy. Because, ultimately, what can the UK do about it? It'll play brilliantly to the MAGA mouthbreathers too - standing up to a supposedly decadent former empire who have gone soft and elected commies.
We're hardly going to withdraw our diplomats.
IF Stephanie Kelton’s ideas hold water then I’d argue it only applies to the US which has the luxury of controlling the world’s global reserve currency.
Ultimately the world has ONE currency issuer and it is not the UK government. Even if a country prints it’s own currency, it is still always going to be a currency user.
Totally nails the MMT fallacy. Ultimately, we have to buy stuff in US dollars. If the markets see (which they do - instantly) the UK creating more £s, the ability to purchase in USD is downgraded.
'Why I started petition for fresh general election'
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cr4ly6p2wxvo
Tory voter Michael Westwood's online document has in a matter of days secured more than 2.5 million signatures backing his plea.
Mr Westwood, who runs the Wagon and Horses pub in Oldbury in the West Midlands, said he launched it because he believed the Labour government - elected on 4 July - had "gone back on the promises" the party made.
Surely admitting that he didn't even support the promises that Labour allegedly made completely undermines his claim to be dissatisfied? Shouldn't he be celebrating the fact that Labour are not carrying out promises which he never supported in the first place?
Claiming to be a dissatisfied Labour voter would make far more sense, instead of publicly confirming what everyone suspected in the first place.
And this also slightly surprised me a :
He added of the petition: "To have my opinion and my thoughts put out there and to find out actually, quite a lot of people agree, I think it's fantastic. It just shows that you're not on your own."
You would have thought that in hindsight he might feel a tad embarrassed with how he expressed his 'opinion and thoughts', I don't think that I have ever seen a more badly worded worded epetition, it looks as if it was written by an eight year old child. I actually feel embarrassed on his behalf.
Everything else is Tory lies driven by Starmer and Reeves’s lack of understanding of the wider economy.
Or they do understand how this works but also understand that they'd get annihilated by the media (and the Opposition).
It's beyond the ability of Joe Public to see beyond tax & spend and the likes of Mrs T's household budget.
I'd suggest you wait and see, Starmer has a history of playing the long game - ask Johnson.
<em style="box-sizing: border-box; --tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246/0.5); --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; color: #000000; font-family: Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, 'Noto Sans', sans-serif, -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Noto Color Emoji';">Mr Westwood, who runs the Wagon and Horses pub in Oldbury in the West Midlands, said he launched it because he believed the Labour government – elected on 4 July – had “gone back on the promises” the party made.
Whenever I've seen this comment online I've asked what these "promises" are, that Labour went back on - currently no one has actually been able to list them, or wanted to. All I get is along the lines of "do your research" crap.
So can anyone here list them?
Mr Westwood is a classic example of what I was getting at on the previous page.
Whatever the 'politically correct' term for it is.
I’d suggest you wait and see, Starmer has a history of playing the long game – ask Johnson.
This is what I'm hoping. The feeding frenzy and expectations that Labour will put right the last 14 years in 6 months is ridiculous and demonstrative of the "everything now" culture. Given the shitshow that was the Tory fiasco from Cameron onwards, I'm happy to let the current administration crack on.
As for the petition mentioned earlier. Please. Some people really do have very little going on in their lives.
Surely the issue with SKS is that he's doing exactly what he said he would, thereby undermining all of those (including many on this thread) who were previously proclaiming that it was all bluff and things would be different once he was elected.
The MPs panel on Five Live is comedy gold. It’s an insight into the mindset of the type of person who signed the petition for a general election.
Some tinfoil-helmeted worzel is presently spouting absolutely crackpot conspiracy theories and complaining about the treatment of the ‘white’ working class.
They hardly needed to ask who he voted for but they did. Lifelong Tory voter who went for Reform this time
Totally nails the MMT fallacy. Ultimately, we have to buy stuff in US dollars.
No one is talking about printing pounds to pay for oil or US goods. That will be done via the time-honoured mechanisms of international trade. What they are talking about though is creating money (as the govt currently does) to spend here in the UK on things that UK businesses and public sector organisations provide. That doesn't need to be bought in dollars, because the entities providing these goods and services don't want to be paid in dollars because they need to pay tax in pounds. The only way this wouldn't be true is if you could go down the supermarket right now and buy your shopping in dollars. I think you'll find you can't.
Right... what's in front of me... right now...
Coffee.
Orange Juice.
Laptop.
Software on said laptop paid by subscription.
...I think you can see where I'm going with this...
No one is talking about printing pounds to pay for oil or US goods
Unfortunately, in a global market, how your currency performs against the dollar affects the price of pretty much everything. Even if you aren't buying oil or goods directly from the US, literally anything you import is going to be from a country that holds significant reserves of dollars.
Like it or not, the UK is a currency user not a currency issuer in the global scheme of things.
…I think you can see where I’m going with this…
You're mistaking international trade with how the govt spends money. It spends money in pounds, not dollars. Yes we need to buy things in dollars, and other countries also need to buy lots of stuff off us in pounds. That will result in a trade surplus or deficit. Traditionally we have a deficit these days but that is miniscule in relation to the entire UK economy. A quick google says our overrall 2023 trade deficit was 15bn against GDP of 2.274tn. The end result is that fluctuations in currency values tend to cancel each other out and do not affect the amount of money the govt can spend. If we bought *all* our goods and services from abroad then you would have a point, but we don't, the balance of trade is pretty much even.
Surely the issue with SKS is that he’s doing exactly what he said he would
Not quite. Five days before the general election :
Starmer’s promise to voters: ‘I will relight the fire of optimism’ in Britain
Since winning the general election it has all been doom, gloom, black holes, and tough decisions.
Voters are clearly not feeling this promised "fire of optimism" which presumably explains why support for Labour is now at approximately the same level as support for the Tories was under Liz Truss's premiership.
So that is one promise to voters which has obviously been broken.
You’re mistaking international trade with how the govt spends money
OK, how does a government spend money?
I would guess it's much the same as anything else that spends money. It either buys things or it pays money to people (ignoring the various accounting tricks to move money around cleverly, money eventually has to be exchanged for goods or services for it to actually be money).
If it buys things then the global supply chain means the exchange rate is going to be an issue. No goods are completely insulated from international trade.
If it pays money to people then that money is going to end up getting spent on stuff that has interacted with the dollar, again, thanks to the global supply chain. It's pretty much unavoidable.
Unless you happen to be the US government. Then much of what you do with your currency is insulated thanks to the massive amounts of USD treasury bonds held by foreign countries and the various goods that can only be traded for in dollars.
Mr Westwood, who runs the Wagon and Horses pub in Oldbury in the West Midlands,
Curiously, although he's been the leaseholder for seven years, apparently, there's another bloke named as the leaseholder from a story earlier this year in the Daily Heil. He runs a drink supply business, which I guess doesn't sound quite as good as 'struggling pub landlord'.
OK, how does a government spend money?
Rone has explained it many times. I doubt we want to go over it again. The key point is that we don't *only* buy things in dollars (and other currencies), we also sell *a lot* of things in pounds, and these pretty much cancel each other out. It applies to all fiat currencies whether you're the dollar or not. Yes the US govt is in a better place because many countries use their currency instead of their own, but that doesn't apply to us. We use the pound in this country and nothing else, and the UK govt as the sole issuer of the pound can use that power to spend more money or not irregardless of what is going on with the dollar.
If it buys things then the global supply chain means the exchange rate is going to be an issue.
Yes but the exchange rate only affects trade, not wider govt spending. The only thing the govt needs to consider when deciding whether to spend more or not is whether the exchange rate affects inflation and whether we have the resources in the economy to meet demand. Some times it does, some times it doesn't, it depends on a whole load of other factors so it's far too simplistic to say MMT 'doesn't work' (silly phrase because that's how it actually does work) because of exchange rates.
We use the pound in this country and nothing else, and the UK govt as the sole issuer of the pound can use that power to spend more money or not irregardless of what is going on with the dollar.
I'm pretty sure that's what Sri Lanka said.
I'm not sure the trade deficit is as negligible as you think it is. And if the UK government started printing even more money then I can only see it going in one direction.
Seriously, the left's sudden enthusiasm for MMT is worrying. It's like we've given up on the idea of enforcing a fair distribution in society and instead have decided that there is actually an infinite money supply so we don't have to worry about getting our money back from the oligarchs and billionaires anymore.
I think we do. I think printing more money is just going to lead to more money going into the pockets of the already obscenely wealthy and even worse levels of poverty for those who don't have any assets.
it depends on a whole load of other factors so it’s far too simplistic to say MMT ‘doesn’t work’ (silly phrase because that’s how it actually does work) because of exchange rates.
It's also silly to say it 'does work'.
It's an interesting theory/observation but the idea that we can simply pay for things and it'll sort itself out is overly-simplistic, particularly when applied to countries that aren't the US.
Like I said, just ask Sri Lanka.
Getting away from the fascinating debate about MMT…
Starmer must be absolutely ecstatic that he’s facing Kemi Badanoch every week at PMQ’s. She is absolutely hopeless! She was actually demanding he should resign on the strength of a petition signed by some six-tied pony-****ers and a load of bots. That was pretty much all she had.
This really is the Tory party’s Corbyn moment.
What they are talking about though is creating money (as the govt currently does) to spend here in the UK on things that UK businesses and public sector organisations provide. That doesn’t need to be bought in dollars, because the entities providing these goods and services don’t want to be paid in dollars because they need to pay tax in pounds.
That's great. So long as we (and everyone else in the world) can distinguish between those special internal pounds sterling and the other type of pounds sterling that is only used internationally.
She is absolutely hopeless!
Yup, definitely. Which must make it particularly embarrassing for Starmer that since Badenoch became leader the Tories appear to have closed the gap with Labour.
In fact if there was a general election this week Badenoch would probably become prime minister.