I see that Sunak is making a desperate last minute attempt to woo the anti-lockdown Tories:
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-62664537
"We shouldn't have empowered the scientists in the way we did," he is quoted as saying.
However inadequate Johnson's pandemic response might have been, and to be fair I never thought it was that inadequate for a Tory, then unless you are an anti-science denialist we should all be grateful that he stood up the anti-lockdown Tories.
For all his failings Johnson put the advice he received from the scientists before pleasing those with trump-like callous disregard for the consequences of pandering to ignorance.
I think it is fair to say that having either Sunak or Truss as Prime Minister during the pandemic would have been far worse for the country.
you only really need the headline.
The actual comments aren't much better.
Nice to see the Torygraph have the same lazy content assemblers as our local rag though, readers comments as "news"? Really?
For all his failings Johnson put the advice he received from the scientists before pleasing those with trump-like callous disregard for the consequences of pandering to ignorance.
Only when he was backed into a corner when confronted with the impending disaster. Are you conveniently forgetting his repeated absenteeism from COBRA meetings to write his shitty Churchill the dog book? His repeated bravado and awful messaging completely ignoring the scientists in Feb and early March 2020?
Some days ernie I can't work out if you're head of Momentum, a failed comedian or just a Tory shill
Are you conveniently forgetting his repeated absenteeism from COBRA meetings to write his shitty Churchill the dog book?
Since you copied and pasted my comment "For all his failings Johnson" you should be able to work that out for yourself.
As for your confusion concerning my political stance it really is very simple, although possibly alien to you. Politics is not a game/fun hobby for me, as it clearly is for many people, it is about striving to achieve what best serves the interests of ordinary working people.
I am not welded to an ideology with complete disregard for whether or not it serves the interests of working people - it must always serve the interests of working people.
Which is why I can happily come to the conclusion that Johnson as PM is preferably to Sunak or Truss. Of course you might not agree and believe instead that Sunak or Truss would serve the interests of ordinary people better, in which case I would be genuinely interested in your argument.
Edit: I currently think that Truss would be preferable as PM than Sunak. Weird isn't it?
The last civil servant in charge of the department who instigated raising the retirement age, retired early on 100 and odd grand a year pension.
Civil Servants don't decide nor dictate policy, it's politicians.
I currently think that Truss would be preferable as PM than Sunak. Weird isn’t it?
Of course she is. Does anyone think otherwise?
Does anyone think otherwise
Me
Why?
Does anyone think otherwise?
Where to even start?
• She's going to borrow billions to reduce corporation tax, who's savings will then be paid out in dividends to shareholders
• She plans to borrow further billions to cut national insurance. A move that will benefit the wealthiest the most and will not help the working poor or those on benefits at all
• The above two things are her total answers to the cost of living crisis. Thats it!
• She's signalled that she has the same, or even worse, attitude to 'ethics' than her predecessor, and he found the whole concept inexplicable
• She's even more in the pocket of the ERG than the fly-tipped sofa
• She's as thick as a Boxing Day turd
• I can't bear the thought of her doing her Fatcha Cosplay for 2 years with a trail of photographers following her round to record and broadcast it
Will that do for starters?
Why on earth do you think she'd be preferable to Sunak?
Admittedly, the question here is 'would you like your huge shit sandwich on brown or white bread?', but still... everything's relative
I think the FT article which I linked yesterday sums it up well - Sunak is a right-winger who appears liberal. Truss is the reverse.
In context of the Tory Party obviously.
Edit: Oh and Sunak has himself claimed to be the true thatcherite out of the two, which to be fair he has a point, on taxation, growth, etc. I have little doubt that he would be her choice, with his views on "hard choices" he appears to share the same callous disregard for the human consequences of monetarism - she didn't flinch when she double unemployment to 3 million.
Surely, they’re both going to claim to be the “more Thatcherite” candidate, while trying to win the votes of people who are very likely to have photos of Thatcher hanging pride of place in their homes.
Terrifying, isn't it?
Whatever shitstorm is rolling our way, picking up speed, the only solutions those two have is 'The Market' must be left to sort it out
Why on earth do you think she’d be preferable to Sunak?
Because despite her rightwing thatcherite cosplay, it's pretty clear that she's a pragmatist and will do whatever she thinks will make her more popular just like Johnson did. There's only one game in town at the moment, and that's what the govt will do about energy prices. The stakes are enormous, on a par with 2008 and 2020. Sunak has been quite clear that he intends to nothing about it and allow market forces to run their course and that will result in an economic collapse that we've not seen since the 30s. On this issue Truss has been less dogmatic, and is more likely to do what is required. It won't be enough of course, but it will be much better than what Sunak is offering. As Cummings said, she'll cave in and do a bailout. I see very little evidence that Sunak would do the same.
On this issue Truss has been less dogmatic, and is more likely to do what is required.
What evidence are you basing that on?
Thats just wishful thinking, surely?
Sunak will do nothing. But Liz will do something that will cost tens, probably hundreds of millions of taxpayers money, and will benefit virtually no-one apart from those least in need of help
There are no good options here
As Cummings said, she’ll cave in and do a bailout.
Again: what on earth are you basing that on? I'd put money on her being stuck like a rabbit in the headlights, stubbornly refusing to do anything at all until its far, far too late
Sunak will do nothing. But Liz will do something that will cost tens, probably hundreds of millions of taxpayers money, and will benefit virtually no-one apart from those least in need of help
Binners it's going to cost hundreds of billions, not millions. I agree she hasn't yet said what she will do, but she's shown more flexibility than Sunak on the policy front and that's what's going to be required. Sunak has nailed his colours to the wall. It's possible he could go back on his promises and do a covid style bailout but it doesn't look likely. He's a fully signed up inflation hawk, and that's the last thing we need right now.
Sorry... typo. I meant hundreds of billions, not millions, obviously
I'm struggling to see how spending hundreds of billions (of taxpayers money) on what we all know full-well will amount to an increase in corporate dividends and boardroom pay will be better than doing nothing?
I mean... both are terrible ideas, obviously... but there you go. The idealogical corner that the modern Tory party has painted itself into
Surely, they’re both going to claim to be the “more Thatcherite” candidate
Of course they are. However Sunak is correct when he makes the claim and Truss isn't.
Sunak is widely accepted to be more Thatcherite on the economy:
I’m struggling to see how spending hundreds of billions (of taxpayers money) on what we all know full-well will amount to an increase in corporate dividends and boardroom pay will be better than doing nothing?
Because in the short term it will prevent households and businesses from going under. You're right that lots of money will end up in the wrong pockets, just like in 2008 and 2020, but the alternative is the whole economy going down in flames, and that will be much worse for working people than a bailout.
Because in the short term it will prevent households and businesses from going under.
Her proposals won't stop a single business or household going under.
How on earth will corporate tax cuts (which will just end up as dividends and corporate bonuses) and a frankly inconsequential cut to NI stop the economic juggernaught presently heading our way?
Her proposals won’t stop a single business or household going under.
I wasn't talking about her proposals, they're clearly nonsense, I'm talking about what she will *have* to do. TBH Sunak would also have to do it, so it probably makes little difference, in the end they'll be presented with a simple choice: Prevent the economy from collapsing by doing a 2008-style bailout, or don't and leave it to the gods. There's not a single politician in the UK who would choose the latter.
This is a pretty good summary of where we are..
There’s not a single politician in the UK who would choose the latter.
Its very out of character for you, but I think you're displaying some wildly misplaced optimism here.
Theres a whole party stuffed full of hardline free marketeers who's slavish worship of 'The Market' lead them to virtually insist on the latter
Surely, they’re both going to claim to be the “more Thatcherite” candidate, while trying to win the votes of people who are very likely to have photos of Thatcher hanging pride of place in their homes.
I find this a weird thing,I like Maggie but wouldn't really want a picture of her on my mantelpiece.
I get it if it was a social or family picture but just to have the picture on its own just seems odd.
But TBH I saw an article on the mirror-online about the Steptoe and son movie(circa 70's) and I was wondering what audience are these articles aimed at as they are so obscure.
Then it came to me must be tory members or something as they are out their trees.
There’s not a single politician in the UK who would choose the latter.
Maybe. But the timing is going to be critical.
These right wing free market nutters, will delay and delay, as doing it is against everything they believe in.
There are a lot of people who are going out of business this winter.
Its very out of character for you, but I think you’re displaying some wildly misplaced optimism here.
Not when you consider the enormity of what economic collapse means. The rich will not be immune to it. The free market nutters have as much to lose as everyone else. More in fact, the higher you are the harder the fall. If there's one thing the rich are very good at it's protecting themselves, and just like in 2008 and 2020 they will do whatever is required. Lets hope you're wrong. 🙂
‘The Market’ must be left to sort it out
It's a shame The Market really doesn't give a shit whether individuals live or die.
Apparently that used to be the job of government.
Meanwhile…
https://twitter.com/richardjmurphy/status/1562806979579768833?s=21&t=Ya54OSu44c3j81avT3k66g
Maybe. But the timing is going to be critical.
These right wing free market nutters, will delay and delay, as doing it is against everything they believe in.
This is absolutely the critical bit, by the the time the people in power start to feel the effects of this it'll be too late. I'm not enamoured of the Scottish power plan to get paid and saddle consumers with 20 years of hiked bills to pay for it.
I find this a weird thing,I like Maggie but wouldn’t really want a picture of her on my mantelpiece.
What is equally weird is how the two contenders for the Tory leadership both want to claim to be the rightful heirs to Thatcher.
Ultimately Thatcher and her policies lost credibility and she became serious electoral liability for the Tories.
So much so that her own cabinet ministers were in effect forced to sack her. Her final humiliation was to be driven away from Downing Street literally in tears.
And in supreme irony, considering how both Sunak and Truss are currently bickering over who has the tax policies which Thatcher would most have approved of, her downfall, more than anything else, is associated with a harebrained, unworkable, totally unjust, taxation policy. Which she herself proudly described as her "flagship policy".
In contrast the current leader of the Tory Party has gone out of his way to very publicly distance himself from Thatcher and her values :
The prime minister chose to contradict his Conservative predecessor Margaret Thatcher’s endorsement of pure individualism made in 1987, when the then PM told a magazine: “There is no such thing as society.”
In his video message, Johnson said: “We are going to do it, we are going to do it together. One thing I think the coronavirus crisis has already proved is that there really is such a thing as society.”
Voters don't have fond memories of Thatcher, Johnson knows that. You have to assume that Sunak and Truss also know that and their overwhelming desire to appeal to dotty old dears in the Tory Party takes precedence. Although ultimately, like Johnson, it is voters who they will need to appeal to.
Voters don’t have fond memories of Thatche
True but don't underestimate how many people essentially liked what she did and stood for. Theres still a lot of that mentality bubbling away under the surface in the same way weve seen a lot of latent racism come to surface again in the last few years.
So our current Foreign Secretary and probably our next PM, has just insulated the President of France, to get some applause off racist Tory pensioners and show off to a right wing journo.
We are absolutely ****ed if we can't get these clowns out.
Daily Express readers will be shocked.
Insulate Britain!
Insulate Britain!
You knew what I meant anyway!
Yeah but don't expect the comedic effect of predictive text to be ignored!
As well insulting Macron it looks like Truss is carrying on with her weekly threat to start a trade war with the EU
https://twitter.com/nealerichmond/status/1562906106800009216?s=21&t=amXcykIOrnLZ17HShH2SZQ
She’s obviously had a good think about it to see how she could make the present crisis even worse
With every week she shows us why she's not really a politician, more of a GBN presenter.
I think the whole of the EU know that France are very much about their own interests over everyone else, and they've been playing this game for a very long time, but as a politician, you don't actually say it, you smile for the camera, say polite stuff and then work behind the scenes to fight it out for whatever you're all after.
Wether by customs officials, paperwork, Channel crossings or energy provision, France has a full tool box with which to squeeze the UK by the balls. They even make our passports FFS.
Anyone care to tell me how the UK can leverage France to any similar degree?
Anyone care to tell me how the UK can leverage France to any similar degree?
Should be well within our gift. I feel certain that I was assured we'd be holding all the cards.
• She’s going to borrow billions to reduce corporation tax, who’s savings will then be paid out in dividends to shareholders
• She plans to borrow further billions to cut national insurance. A move that will benefit the wealthiest the most and will not help the working poor or those on benefits at all
There's no real borrowing in this context and they will probably use Q/E to balance the bond purchasing.
Stop making it sound like she's actually borrowing cash.
Sunak merely wants to contract everything which will by definition contract things even more than where we are now
But Liz will do something that will cost tens, probably hundreds of millions of taxpayers money, and will benefit virtually no-one apart from those least in need of help
Please stop with this falsehood. We have done hundreds of posts on how the government finances things. It's not through taxation.
If you want to learn one thing - then MMT is an incredibly useful tool for understanding government finances.
By all means fill your posts with outrage but at least don't whinge on a about borrowing without getting your head around the mechanisms.
Truss is bound to do something - there will be no choice. Let's at least see it pan out.
Think back to the banking crisis 2008 - could the banks - have bailed themselves out? The private sector coming to rescue of the private sector?
No.
So the government has to create the funds to solve the problem. Or solve one part of the problem.
Sorry another Murphy post with costs.
https://twitter.com/RichardJMurphy/status/1563075741235159047?t=wKjt6UoWXVktYDhvCN7ozg&s=19
That's still only 1/3 of Covid support.
There is an extensive report behind this.
So the government has to create the funds to solve the problem. Or solve one part of the problem.
If it was this easy, why don't we just QE our way out of everything? Just print billions and hand it out to everyone?
It may not be *borrowing*, but it is resources which a) are finite, because b) QE does impact other economic factors which are 'negative' long term, no?
IANAE
Inkster: "Anyone care to tell me how the UK can leverage France to any similar degree?"
We can't, at all. BUT, what we can do is cause them some harm, and then our leaders can say "look, France is suffering too" and people will cheer.
Matt_OAB: "If it was this easy, why don’t we just QE our way out of everything? Just print billions and hand it out to everyone?"
There's politics in this of course- who wants to be the PM that admits they've been doing it wrong for years? So much of our political debate is rooted in the tax vs spend logic and in the nice simple falsehoods of "balancing the books" and "fiscal responsibility".
The other thing is, there probably are impacts, we just don't really know what they are. We've pretty well established that the traditional popular arguments against QE are bullshit. But it's also obvious that money can't be unlimited if it's going to work at all. Currency isn't just a way of paying for stuff, it's also a way of imposing scarcity and controls, it's possible to forget with all the flimflam that it's ultimately a way of exchanging goods which do have a fixed value and can't just be printed. If governments get far enough into printing it the whole construct can unravel. When it comes right down to it we're still exchanging goods for shiny beads.
Basically, we act like the current structure makes sense and works because it's right or logical or underwritten by some sort of natural law. It's not, in fact we don't understand it, and it runs on faith, deception, luck and habit. Things have value because we think they do, financial markets can be completely disconnected to the real economy, things that add no value are treated like they're more important than things that do. It's all a big cup game but, it does sort of work and there's a risk that if we watch the cups too closely, it stops working.
Ultimately I don't like it- I wish we had a system that makes sense and rewards value creation properly. But the decade after the current bodge stops working is going to be No Fun At All.
(though, maybe since we have at least one bigger crisis on the way, it'd make sense to get it over with)
Anyone care to tell me how the UK can leverage France to any similar degree?
Liz could restrict our cheese exports
