Forum menu
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.
Polling at this point in the electoral cycle is completely and utterly meaningless. In fact you could argue after recent events that all polling is completely and utterly pointless.
i’m sure Starmer isn’t unduly concerned about a gammonbot petition that everyone will have forgotten about by next week. He knows that the leader of HM opposition is as clueless as the present one and that the shadow cabinet contains absolute dimwits like Helen Whately.
His main opposition, in reality, appears to be Jeremy Clarkson
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.
Nope, redistribution is central to MMT. It's the main objective of fiscal policy, along with tackling economic externalities (pollution etc) and being able to target strategic industrial sectors and social groups. I don't know of a single MMT advocate who thinks we shouldn't tax the rich more whilst spending more. The two go hand in hand, becaue otherwise you'll get runaway inflation. The only difference is that the purpose of tax is to restrict inflation and achieve social and economic change, rather than having to raise money to spend on stuff.
I’m pretty sure that’s what Sri Lanka said.
Yes and Zimbabwe, weimar germany blah blah. These are not valid comparisons. Britain is a 2 trillion per year economy with one of the worlds most stable and respected fiat currencies, alongside significant political and military geo-political power. Comparing the UK to Sri Lanka is laughable.
It’s also silly to say it ‘does work’.
Well it's working right now as that's how our money system works. If it didn't work the economy would have already collapsed. What doesn't work is the way it is obfuscated by pretending that we are 'borrowing' money from investors (where do they get their money from?) and basing policy on the myth that the govt operates like a household or business.
I don’t know of a single MMT advocate who thinks we shouldn’t tax the rich more whilst spending more.
Well, that’s what’s happening.
basing policy on the myth that the govt operates like a household or business
Policy isn’t based on that myth, but language people understand is used to explain policy. Tax and spend interact, even though what is spent isn’t restricted or funded by the amount that is taxed. These interactions are complex. Politicians need to speak to people without the time or inclination to look into those complexities.
Taxes need to rise. More importantly, they need to be shifted further towards wealth holders and larger companies. When people start with the “tax doesn’t matter”, “people won’t stand for a larger tax burden” when taxes are raised on land owners, building owners, share owners, non-doms or whoever, it only echoes and validates the populists that sell simple solutions based on low taxation and a diminished public realm (with a side portion of burning more fossil fuels to “maintain living standards”).
Yes and Zimbabwe, weimar germany blah blah. These are not valid comparisons
To date, Sri Lanka is the only country to have implemented anything resembling an MMT policy. @BruceWee is not just using it as an example of a country that's had a runaway currency problem. The outcome was that instead of the expected MMT theory expectation of the policy having little to no effect on inflation, it was in fact a huge driver of inflation (for obvious reasons really)
and the UK govt as the sole issuer of the pound can use that power to spend more money
But Sterling isn't just a currency it's a traded commodity in every money market all around the world, 24 hours a day. What happens when you have more of a thing than the market can accommodate?
the Tories appear to have closed the gap with Labour.
The Tories are one of the strongest performing political parties the world has ever seen, that they've regrouped from a defeat (even as large as the one they suffered in the Summer) should come as a surprise to no one. Remember that Labour were ahead of the Tories from Sept 2022 to the election, and it made not one bit of difference in all that time how the Tories governed.