General observation - Labour are gradually realising they've absolutely got to spend now. Tomorrow will be interesting.
No more talk of market spooking shite please. Get away from Centrist exposition of Truss. It's a self harm and not comparable to anything approaching reality of where we are.
Get on with job.
(Employment numbers looking a bit shaky.)
General observation - Labour are gradually realising they've absolutely got to spend now. Tomorrow will be interesting.
No more talk of market spooking shite please. Get away from Centrist exposition of Truss. It's a self harm and not comparable to anything approaching reality of where we are.
Get on with job.
(Employment numbers looking a bit shaky.)
Got to giggle at the idea that Labour can now 'afford" the WFA because they've fixed the economy. Lmfao. Don't be ridiculous you're just running a slightly bigger deficit than the Tories.
They don't help themselves.
The harder problem is people currently trusting Reform more than Labour.
The harder problem is getting people to vote who are thoroughly disengaged by this political circus.
A few hundred thousand people turning out in swing states in the US would have changed the next four years; this also applies to the UK
The harder problem is people currently trusting Reform more than Labour.
The harder problem is getting people to vote who are thoroughly disengaged by this political circus.
A few hundred thousand people turning out in swing states in the US would have changed the next four years; this also applies to the UK
Er, you do remember that British voters gave the Labour Party a landslide victory less than a year ago, don't you? Never mind about what happened in swing states in the United States.
Er, you do remember that British voters gave the Labour Party a landslide victory less than a year ago, don't you? Never mind about what happened in swing states in the United States.
Er, we're talking about the next by-elections and GE in the UK. What's passed isn't a guarantee of future performance
General observation - Labour are gradually realising they've absolutely got to spend now. Tomorrow will be interesting.
Says a lot about the political nous of Starmer and his advisors if they've only just realised this. They thought people would be grateful for labour not being the tories, even though they stood on a central platform of 'change'. Now they're realising that voters did actually want them to change stuff, mainly by loosening the purse strings and starting to spend money which hadn't been spent in 14 years. But no, instead of doing what the voters told them, they listened to financiers and economists in the city instead who told them they couldn't do what the voters wanted. There's a lesson there somewhere, not that politicians will ever learn it.
For sure.
I'm guessing the Lizz Truss thing gave them the shits. That's how i read it. Bone-headed logic when you've got stuff falling apart and she was actually pursuing a pointless agenda of tax-cuts.
Labour need to fend of the idea that spending is bad and get their narrative in order - but they came to the podium with too much of the fiscal crediblity thing going off. Of course fiscal crediblity is totally ideological because you trade real outcomes instead, and we can see where that has landed them.
Fiscal crediblity (which is an arbitrary implementation) does nothing to fix real problems - just makes Treasury brains and Bond vigilantes happy for all the wrong reasons, who should really be put in their place.
Er, we're talking about the next by-elections and GE in the UK.
So why are you talking about swing states in the US then?
You seemed to be suggesting that it is difficult to get the electorate to vote correctly. Despite the fact that they totally abandoned the Tories less than a year ago and gave Labour a huge landslide victory.
Er, we're talking about the next by-elections and GE in the UK.
So why are you talking about swing states in the US then?
You seemed to be suggesting that it is difficult to get the electorate to vote correctly. Despite the fact that they totally abandoned the Tories less than a year ago and gave Labour a huge landslide victory.
I'm not suggesting anything of the sort. Labour's "huge landslide victory" was based on a turnout of only 60%, the second lowest since 1885
I'm suggesting that if we follow the example of the US (63.9% turnout) and fail to vote then strange outcomes are possible.
If Harris had picked up the right mix of 229,726 votes in Michigan (80,103), Pennsylvania (120,226), and Wisconsin (29,397), she would be taking the oath of office on January 20. To put that number in comparison, had Hillary Clinton picked up the right mix of 78,000 votes in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, she would have won the Electoral College in 2016. Had Trump picked up the right mix of 65,000 votes in Arizona, Georgia, Wisconsin, and Nebraska's second congressional district, he would have won the Electoral College outright in 2020. https://www.cfr.org/article/2024-election-numbers
I don't know what you mean by "difficult to get the electorate to vote correctly", but we should vote and for whoever we want to. We all saw the outcome of "tactical" voting by so-called professional politicians allowing Kemi Badenoch her leadership win.
Spending review then?
More incoherent logic or respond to the looming threat of Reform and collapsing society?
I'm sure they will find a way to get to the 5% GDP defense spending - that's a given but not without some sort of trade-off against something necessary.
They will also claim they've fixed the finances - err 22bn black-hole (never existed) fixed with a 1.4bn WFA cut and then re-instated... Such a silly game to pretend there are 'pay-fors' in government finances.
And a larger deficit now - fine to be expected, but then don't pretend you've filled anything.
Labour's "huge landslide victory" was based on a turnout of only 60%, the second lowest since 1885
I'm suggesting that if we follow the example of the US (63.9% turnout) and fail to vote then strange outcomes are possible.
The reason for the low turnout was because much of the Tory vote stayed at home. The Tories actually received half the vote the vote in 2024 that they had received 5 years earlier, the Labour vote on the other hand remained almost the same.
Depending on what you are trying to achieve a higher turnout is not necessarily the best solution.
A Jewish Labour councillor has been deselected for supporting a ceasefire in Gaza before it became official Labour Party policy (yes that's correct the Labour Party supports a ceasefire in Gaza despite supplying weapons and intelligence to Netanyahu and his far-right government so that they can commit genocide)
My stance on Palestine and what is happening in Gaza has always been a matter of conscience for me and has been long before 7th October 2023. For me and a rapidly increasing number of Jewish people ‘Never again’ means never again for everyone and we see it as our duty to speak out against this genocide and shout it loud and clear “not in our name!”
And councillor Martin Abrams hits the nail on the head with this comment :
“Right now we have a Labour Council in Lambeth, a Labour Mayor of London and now a Labour Government, and after 15 years of Tory destruction there is no longer any justification, locally or nationally, to inflict further cuts or austerity on people."
He is obviously eloquent in speaking as a Labour councillor should be speaking, I have no doubt that is the real reason that he has been deselected, backing a Green Party motion calling for a halt to the genocide in Gaza was simply the excuse. The Labour Party really is rotten, we deserve so much better, especially after 15 years of Tory rule.
Spending Review
My hot take based on info I read earlier and tonight's news.
Overall, I'm pretty happy with what's been announced in the review.
It's not perfect, far from it but few things in life are, particularly when they concern politics and money.
Yeah, about time Labour but better late than never. This is a far, far better direction of travel.👍
Get rid of the 2 child cap and I'll be even happier.
Yes some some spending like this will make a difference - it's not really that much (20bn per year more than the Tories) but it's probably all we can squeeze out of them currently.
I do fear they're constantly looking for clawbacks and who they will target next ...
They desperately need it - growth in April -0.3% is not going to sell well today.
Already, a loony Tory (on radio) was on their case talking shite about spending though he did get something correct inadvertently - he called it "spend first and tax later" - as some sort of a slur, but that's exactly what happens. He needs to ask himself - how do you tax back without spending the money in the first place? It has to exist first. Dumb.
These economic critics are so poorly informed.
he called it "spend first and tax later
I heard him spout that on the news last night and said exactly the same as you said to the OH. Her worry was who they'd be taxing it from though.
Er, you do remember that British voters gave the Labour Party a landslide victory less than a year ago, don't you? Never mind about what happened in swing states in the United States
no - the stupid electoral system did that. The electorate gave them just over 1/3 of the vote
The electorate gave them just over 1/3 of the vote
Which is a lot more than they gave the Tories. How the electorate voted had a direct effect on the election result, unsurprisingly.
Her worry was who they'd be taxing it from though
Yes Labour have got their heads in a mess over this.
I'm less worried at the current time though - get the investment in.
Whilst all this is less than exciting - if they do get some growth out of this further down the line - I hope they get why.
(Not that I'm an advocate of endless growth but they need to prove the system. SPEND>GROWTH>TAX - But ultimately it might not help because the Dems did well on growth but no one took any notice. That's why spending on stuff that changes people's lives at the micro level is extremely important. If people see things happening on their doorstep the Labour vote might not crumble.)
The debate will shift away from the current stuff about migrants etc and the national debt will become the hot topic. Better to fight that one and give people stuff they need.
https://twitter.com/StevenHailAus/status/1932925883964404167?t=We3zXlCELfh2_7C2Hprz0Q&s=19
The attacks will come thick and fast.
Reeves has been a disaster so far for sure but the myths about how the economy works need to be pushed back on irrespective.
Such as this IMF drivel. See the Tory fool here repeating this absolute half-wit myth based logic. The only place you can get £ from is the BoE. Not the IMF - end of.
It's like the Gordon Brown 'sold our gold' pub debate... Without understanding that government's sell off assets all the time.
That gold easily replaced with currency.
https://stephaniekelton.substack.com/p/can-it-1976-happen-again
Sorry post expired. But here's a very slight summary of why the IMF story doesn't apply today
(The UK was up to its neck in foreign debt such was the overlap from gold standard / bretton woods.)
Doesn't apply today.
yes that's correct the Labour Party supports a ceasefire in Gaza despite supplying weapons and intelligence to Netanyahu and his far-right government so that they can commit genocide
And the government has admitted that it is currently training IDF personnel in the UK as it commits genocide in Gaza
"As part of routine Defence engagement with Israel, the UK is currently training a limited number of Israel Defense Forces personnel on UK-based training courses."
Don't let minor issues such as war crimes and genocide stop "routine" defence engagements from taking place in the UK, eh?
The IMF doesn’t lend in local currency, but in SDRs, which are sort of (over simplification) pegged to a basket of big currencies, dollar being the most important of course. All this “can’t run out of its own currency” talk is both true and irrelevant if a country is in crisis. [ which of course, the UK is not ]
The IMF doesn’t lend in local currency, but in SDRs, which are sort of (over simplification) pegged to a basket of big currencies, dollar being the most important of course. All this “can’t run out of its own currency” talk is both true and irrelevant if a country is in crisis. [ which of course, the UK is not ]
Yeah but it's not stopping the uninformed going gangbusters with it.
Although I don't know why you cite "can't run out of its own currency" as irrelevant. People literally think the country will be going to the IMF for pounds.
When it absolutely will never be the case.
As an aside did you see the screaming Daily Mail headline? They reckon we're on the hook for trillions!
WTF are they talking about? Okay don't issue bonds then. The whole interpretation of the system we have is madness and big fat lie.
https://twitter.com/AdamBienkov/status/1933288402423533650?t=EheLHdiKTiEsleuM1BIAVQ&s=19
In the grand scheme of things this spending review isn't really much. It's just better than what we had. In fact it looks like clawbacks might be in the distance.
This is what drive me crackers, you have a government which was trying to appease the right by looking prudent and still not appeasing them. In some ways we have the worst of both worlds now - a Chancellor that perhaps wants to do some good but feels the need the keep putting lids on things with shonky rules and mysterious taxation plans.
We will only win this argument if we start pushing back against the idea that 'our kids are on the hook for the debt' - which was said as far back as Reagan/Thatcher. Of course no one talked about this during the pandemic - because everyone was scared of real outcomes affecting them.
These people have controlled the narrative for the benefit of a lucky few - at the expense of a crumbling state for decades.
I really wish you could just accept that Stephanie Kelton might not be the final word in all fiscal matters, rone.
It's a bit more complicated than you or even she thinks.
And always remember, Stephanie Kelton sees everything through a US centric view. And yes, the chances of the US dollar being devalued to the point of being worthless is highly unlikely (although Trump has been doing a pretty good job of showing that it's more vulnerable than people have thought up until now).
The pound is not the world's reserve currency. Treating it like it is a dangerous game to play.
That's not to say that investment isn't urgently needed. It's just that if you assume it's as simple as printing money and taxing later then you are going to find a lot of rich people have gotten much much richer while everyone else has gotten much much poorer.
Your focus on MMT takes away focus from the real issue which is that the vast majority of wealth circulates in a closed loop system where people who can pay for privileged access can siphon off a small percentage by having a slight advantage. Thanks to the miracle of compounding gains these people are now rich in a way we can't even comprehend anymore.
Until you solve that problem the system you use to manage government spending is completely irrelevant. Every other post is you preaching about something that is completely irrelevant to the problem at hand.
I really wish you could just accept that Stephanie Kelton might not be the final word in all fiscal matters, rone.
Challenge me on my knowledge then?
It's not just Stephanie Kelton. Btw.
Few facts for you:
The dollar being the reserve currency is one thing - MMT is another.
It's just that if you assume it's as simple as printing money and taxing later then you are going to find a lot of rich people have gotten much much richer while everyone else has gotten much much poorer
But that's how the system works. There is no other way currently. We spend first and tax later. Fact.
What you've failed to acknowledge like many which just can't get a handle on our finances is the system works one way and the politicians pretend it works another.
Don't blame me or MMT for the current system.
No one ever said it was as simple as just issuing money (it's not printed by the way. ) What we are saying is that politicians pretend there is a lack of money when there isn't. That works against you.
So when Labour come to power and say there is a black-hole and we can't do xyz - then all of sudden they can. What do you think?
Your focus on MMT takes away focus from the real issue which is that the vast majority of wealth circulates in a closed loop system where people who can pay for privileged access can siphon off a small percentage by having a slight advantage.
Rubbish. (And if this the case - tax them - no one in MMT is against taxation.)
MMT and my focus exist to push back against narratives that exist to keep society ticking over on poor outcomes and choices because of mythical restrictions.
MMT doesn't say anything about other types of political problems so therefore doesn't take away from it.
You're basically like many others totally warping the position of MMT to make the point that what - we have poor distribution? A poor taxation system, inequality ?
Just what the heck is your point?
I mean perhaps if when Labour came to power they'd not gone down this rough austerity drive (self-imposed) we wouldn't be looking at Reform down the barrel now would we.
So, no I don't get your logic. Mine has been vindicated time and time again that when push comes to shove government's like ours (and the USA, Canada etc) can begin a program of fixing stuff despite the lack of money arguments.
Why would any progressive take a stand against that?
Bruce we've literally just had a spending review which *maybe* could change the course of Labour's luck and start to turn the outlook on the government's focus and you want to push back at the financial choices that allowed this to happen - simply because I speculated how this might occur?
It's MMT front and centre. If you don't want the discussion don't engage with it - but it won't change facts.
Byline Times are positing that Ms Reeves is moving us away from a neo-liberal US style economy to a Social Democratic Scandinavian style economy. If it works it will be a novel experience for everyone.
Just what the heck is your point?
My point is that you make the same point over and over again as if creating/printing money would somehow magically fix everything.
It won't.
When people do work they create value*. However you want to measure that value is irrelevant.
The problem is that the value that is created is currently flowing to those at the very top and everyone else is getting poorer. Until this issue is addressed how you want to describe the economic system is irrelevant.
You are assuming that the rest of us are particularly dense and that is why we don't agree with your analysis. We aren't. We simply understand that until something is done about the steady flow of value to the top then talk of MMT is irrelevant.
*Obviously not all work results in actual value but for the sake of this argument let's assume it does. Although, of course, it could be argued that a lot of this valueless work is at least partially the cause of much of the financial issues that are plaguing the middle and working classes across the World.
We simply understand that until something is done about the steady flow of value to the top then talk of MMT is irrelevant.
Taxation would sort that out and teaching everyone the meaning of "enough".
EDIT Before anyone says that the rich will leave, studies show that no, they won't. We can live with 0.2% wastage of the inordinately rich.
Taxation would sort that out and teaching everyone the meaning of "enough".
The problem is, I'm not sure if it's as simple as that.
Part of the problem is that the financial markets are not working as they are supposed to. They are supposed to bring excess capital and entrepreneurs together so that any excess value can be used to improve society.
However, in 2016 it was estimated that 85% of money in the financial markets was circulating in a closed loop (and there's no reason to think that percentage isn't even higher today). This money is traded back and forth and people who were able to figure out the best way to game the system were gaining a few percent every year. Being able to pay for more privileged access also helps.
No doubt many of us on here have money in pensions or invested in the stock market. This money is not being funneled to entrepreneurs to improve society. It is simply going round the loop and we are hoping that whoever is in charge of our money is at least able to keep up.
We're are actively paying into the system that is making us and everyone else in society poorer.
I really don't know what the solution is which is the scary part. One thing I do know is that talk of MMT is simply rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.
That ^^ would be funnier if Reform hadn't led in the last 43 consecutive national opinion polls since mid-April
I really don't know what the solution is which is the scary part.
A financial transactions tax would be good start. Encourage longer term investment instead of short term trading. We could also easily regulate the pensions industry to enforce less risky and longer term investments.
I’ll say it again though, the simplest and most effective way to redistribute wealth from the top to the bottom is wealth taxes. Tax wealth not work.
We could also easily regulate the pensions industry to enforce less risky and longer term investments
Afaics my pension is a pretty basic 60/40 split equities/bonds, which seems to be what Missy consider a sensible balance? I'm not aware of any great scandal of a pension fund going down due to risky investments? Company fiunds being plundered, yes.
I'm not aware of any great scandal of a pension fund going down due to risky investments?
It's not really the point Bruce was making. He's saying the finance industry basically recycles investors/pensioners money, extracting a percentage each time making bankers/traders very rich in the process. He's absolutely right that the finance industry and financial markets are organised to enable banks and financial companies to extract rent from people's savings, and MMT doesn't address that (nor is it intended to). The risk in an MMT world as we saw during covid and post-2008 is that lots of the money created by govt to prop up the economy or stimulate growth ends up in the pockets of bond investors and bankers in the city.
Double post silliness!
The problem is, I'm not sure if it's as simple as that.
If the political will is there it is that simple. Make the requirements enforceable/strict liability and the penalties not worth the game. That would mean mandatory prison time and disqualification for those stepping outside the rules, as fines are considered a cost of business.
And the government has admitted that it is currently training IDF personnel in the UK as it commits genocide in Gaza
And now committing to “defend” Israel if Iran should have the impertinence to defend itself.
My hope is that Farage and reform will destroy our current two party system. Both Labour and the Conservatives are antiquated parties of the 20th century and are no longer fit for purpose. The tories are already on the floor bleeding out and need curb stomping into oblivion, Labour seem to be doing their best to follow them and I'm all for it.
The push and pull between left and right is what makes democracy work and neither party is doing their job. It's time to clear away the old dead wood and let new shoots grow. The time of political revolution is here and it's not without its dangers but we either roll the dice or carry on as we are and be destroyed.
My hope is that Farage and reform will destroy our current two party system
if you think farage whos been a former stockbroker career politician for 30 odd years and is currently on his 4th? political party
who has been caught defrauding the taxpayer, https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-42669293
and stashing his £££ offshore
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-23001529
and caught lying numerous times , https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/seb-dance/nigel-farage-seb-dance_b_14591852.html
when he was an MEP never bothered to turn up and vote for things he claimed to care about
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/ukip-leader-nigel-farage-worst-8302679
and even as an MP has been on 4 holidays this year alone and accepted ££££ from '2nd jobs' whilst barely turning up to his constituency or parliament
......is going to be the answer, then you are a spectacularly gullible and naive person billabong
No I think the criticism of Farage is entirely justified but if he's able to obliterate our two main parties he'll have done all of us a good service. It seems to me that in my lifetime neither left or right leaning people have felt well represented by the parties that should represent them and this needs to change.
Destruction can be fun to talk about. But what does it mean? Who will it put in power? What will that mean for the normal people that live here?
There is a good case, potentially, for Labour and the Tories getting a good kick up the arse but is Farage and Reform the right person and movement to do so? I really don't think they are.
Numerous reasons but the slavish adoption of DOGE and Reforms equally poor Musk like (even worst than Musk in fact) implementation tells me that they have anything new to offer.
I still think we will have to endure a Reform government at some point though. Their supporters need to see the lie in action.
Good help us all.
Always surprises me to hear people parrot "we need more businessmen/women involved in politics". When every time, without fail, they abolish/water down regulations and laws that hinder them making even more money and give them and their ilk as many tax breaks and handouts from the public purse as they can get away with. All whilst talking a load of bollocks to divert attention away and/or being seen to solve inconsequential things.
Watching politicians tack things onto law changes, that no one asked for is another ****s trick.
My hope is that Farage and reform will destroy our current two party system.
Depressing to see that the "I don't trust any of them, any change would be better" myth around Farage still has some adherents.
The notion that Farage is a disrupter in any meaningful way is laughable. He's not a positive force for change. He's a cancer.
Always surprises me to hear people parrot "we need more businessmen/women involved in politics". When every time, without fail, they abolish/water down regulations and laws that hinder them making even more money and give them and their ilk as many tax breaks and handouts from the public purse as they can get away with.#
Yes, not said enough.
Running essential utilities etc like we have done delivers the results we have.
Regulations are often pointless in this domain because you regulate them that much (and they will take the fines) that they may as well simply be under public control/owned delivering for public purpose. They know the game.
This country especially under Starmer shows an embarrassing lack of pragmatism whilst dressed up to be pragamatic - but one inch of scrutiny would demonstrate this not be the case.
The aim is alway to keep the neoliberal construct in place no matter the failures and the poor outcomes - and then to believe it could be just done better - somehow, whilst selling to the centre right that we can't afford to do it. With many things in life we can't afford not to.
The notion that Farage is a disrupter in any meaningful way is laughable.
Well many personally credit Farage with the UK leaving the EU. And the last 50 opinion polls have placed Reform UK in the lead, a totally unprecedented position for a third party in the UK. Plus a year ago the Tory Party suffered their worst election defeat in 200 years, something which can be fairly attributed to Reform UK.
I reckon that Nigel Farage can be reasonably described as "a disrupter" even if he didn't create the conditions which he is now successfully exploiting.
The notion that Farage is a disrupter in any meaningful way is laughable. He's not a positive force for change. He's a cancer.
He's been around a long time now "influencing" politics in the UK, and nothing he has done has had a positive effect on the other parties or the wider political landscape. He's just dragged everyone down to his own gutter level and is beating them with experience
Their supporters need to see the lie in action.
Without a doubt but they will just blame something else for any mess.
The best solution is to redefine narratives and put fixes in place - proper life-changing fixes that people then won't vote for garbage.
He's just dragged everyone down to his own gutter level and is beating them with experience
This. If everyone truly believes the battle for elections is won from the 'right' then what do we expect? Lots of right-wing parties all broadly offering the same messed up ideology with each one claiming they know how to solve things with more efficiency.
Been there, done that. It's failed.
You got to go the other way - and create things that people feel change their outlook.
I meant disrupter in the positive sense of the word. Not the snake oil salesman sense.
I fear that Labour seemingly refusing to implement any sort of sane proportional representation before the next GE around 2029 is going to terminally bite them in the behind.
FPTP is such a horrible system in this modern age and the way things seem to be heading, next time around it could worryingly be a Reform landslide.
