Forum menu
The BoE manage the QE/QT programme, not the government, same with rates.
I get what the BOE is in charge of, I was wondering why these moves are being made and a 5% base rate with 2.5% inflation figure and a flat economy is there not a risk of tipping into recession?
Think they are less worried about recession, hence freezing and seeing what impact other things have before reviewing a rates cut next time, would love a rates cut, getting a mortgage renewal soon, but the reality is that a lot of analysts predicted this, with a battle between controlling inflation versus lower growth being at the centre of it.
with a battle between controlling inflation versus lower growth being at the centre of it.
The growth has traditionally been low even with low interests rates.
Inflation would have receded anyway and it's unlikely that interest rates are effective (nominally) - I mean paying millionaires 5% return is hardly going in the right direction when you're attempting to contract the economy.
BoE have not really been in control of inflation in the way they think they have.
The fact the Fed started cutting with 0.5 is interesting.
Anyway, back to the PM’s perks picked-up by the popular press . . . great fun for a little lighthearted merriment. However, a tit-bit that they’ve not bothered with yet, but was mentioned by Damo on YouTube yesterday was this little story ‘Labour given £4m from tax haven-based hedge fund with shares in oil and arms’. I imagine that four million quid buys a lot of favours.
I'm normally happy to give news reporting a pass for the sorts of hyperbole and the 'slips' of grammatical inference that slant stories to a particular agenda, it goes with the territory, and you get used to spotting it. That Open Democracy piece is woeful even by the [very] looser standards of internet partisanship that don't have to worry about print journalism standards, which are let's face it; not particularly stringent.
This means that despite being made on 28 May, Quadrature’s generous donation was published by the Electoral Commission only last week, more than two months after Labour won the election.
Starmer says that there is a substantial difference between declaration and corruption, which reminds me of how during the parliamentary expenses scandal many MPs justified their greed by pointing out that it was within the rules, which it mostly was.
But what strikes at the very heart of the above revelation is the deliberate attempt to withhold the truth.
So much for honesty and integrity from the Labour leadership.
Anyway, back to the PM’s perks picked-up by the popular press . . . great fun for a little lighthearted merriment. However, a tit-bit that they’ve not bothered with yet, but was mentioned by Damo on YouTube yesterday was this little story ‘Labour given £4m from tax haven-based hedge fund with shares in oil and arms’. I imagine that four million quid buys a lot of favours.
I think for every £1 million donated the company should get at least a 10% deduction on their tax, and at least one waiver against applicable regulation or legislation that they want, this of course would only be covered in the 12 months post donation.
That Open Democracy piece is woeful even by the [very] looser standards of internet partisanship that don’t have to worry about print journalism standards, which are let’s face it; not particularly stringent.
What did the article say that was untrue?
What did the article say that was untrue?
Precisely.
The biggest ever single donation to the Labour Party? A hedge fund based, off-shore, in the Cayman Islands? Links to private health, fossil fuel companies and arms manufacturers? Potentially dodgy timing so it didn’t have to be declared until NOW? The absolute ****ers, how dare they?
Dodgy donation, and the timing says that they knew it would be seen that way. It would be lovely to think that national votes can be won on the back of just small donations from us little people, but it’s not true, is it. I hope the donator’s backing for renewables goes well beyond greenwashing… if what they’re expecting out of this is the UK accelerating its green energy transition, well I hope that happens… and I’m indifferent to them (and others) making money out of that.
if what they’re expecting out of this is the UK accelerating it’s green transition
I would suggest thats optimistic to say the least. You only need to look at Drax to see that "green transition" translate in many eyes to "profit" or just look at some of the games being played around carbon credits and the use of rainforest carbon offsets.
If thats not enough Macquarie have got heavily into solar energy. Given how they trashed the water system do you really think they have found a conscience?
That's it for me, how do we overthrow this corrupt and far right government that we've had to suffer for so long and install our rightful champions of the people?!
I would suggest thats optimistic to say the least
Fair. It’s a very big “if”…
That’s it for me, how do we overthrow this corrupt and far right government that we’ve had to suffer for so long and install our rightful champions of the people?!
Did Binners make that image for you, it's as hilarious as when he posts them.
Questioning what we hoped was a party better than the tory party in pretty much every way is the right thing to do isn't it? (Especially so when so far they don't really seem to appear to be much better)
That’s it for me, how do we overthrow this corrupt and far right government that we’ve had to suffer for so long and install our rightful champions of the people?!
Well I don't know about that but I do know how you deal with any criticism of the current prime minister, it has become a very clear pattern...... you somehow mention Corbyn.
At least Kelvin puts a bit of effort into it, if he bothers at all.
What did the article say that was untrue?
Passages like this;
Neither the Labour Party press office nor No 10 responded to openDemocracy’s questions on whether the timing of accepting this donation was intended to minimise scrutiny and critical coverage during the election.
Are no better than "when did you stop beating your wife" or more precisely "Does your contempt for the UK's laws influence your acceptance of this donation from those people of whom we don't approve" and are about as transparent in their slant. I don't mind writers taking sides, or having an agenda in fact there's probably an argument for doing it more on subjects, but this speculation touted as 'journalism' is wild
Well I don’t know about that but I do know how you deal with any criticism of the current prime minister, it has become a very clear pattern…… you somehow mention Corbyn.
As I mentioned before, If you don't support this govt feel free to make any criticism or be as partisan as you want, just don't clutch at your pearls when others do the same in return. It's silly.
Passages like this
It is perfectly standard protocol for an investigative piece to mention that specific questions were put to whoever they were investigating, and what their replies were or whether they didn't even bother replying. They all do it.
It doesn't suggest that they have said anything untrue, you're clutching straws.
Are no better than “when did you stop beating your wife” or more precisely “Does your contempt for the UK’s laws influence your acceptance of this donation from those people of whom we don’t approve” and are about as transparent in their slant. I don’t mind writers taking sides, or having an agenda in fact there’s probably an argument for doing it more on subjects, but this speculation touted as ‘journalism’ is wild
I asked you if there were any untruths in the article. You seem to be answering a different question. In any case, it's not clear to me why you seem so upset: the timing is certainly convenient, so it's reasonable to ask Labour if it was a factor.
just don’t clutch at your pearls when others do the same in return.
You are joking, I think it's great when argee can't think of anything else to say other than to somehow mention Corbyn.......it is a public declaration of intellectual bankruptcy, I love it!
It doesn’t suggest that they have said anything untrue, you’re clutching straws.
If you believe that, I've a bridge to sell you
As I mentioned before, If you don’t support this govt feel free to make any criticism or be as partisan as you want, just don’t clutch at your pearls when others do the same in return. It’s silly.
We don't all see it as a football match.
We don’t all see it as a football match.
Oh give over, you're yakking on a bike forum to put off that bit of work you don't want to start just before lunch on a Friday.
Oh give over, you’re yakking on a bike forum to put off that bit of work you don’t want to start just before lunch on a Friday.
Absolutely. Which has nothing to do with what I said. Please don't judge everyone else through the lens of your own motivations.
Uh huh, you love being reminded about what a complete and utter failure Corbyn was, I can tell.
Really? You want to follow argee diversionary tactic and divert the thread onto Corbyn?
You have also obviously run out of anything constructive to say with regards to the latest revelations.
And as you know I have never been Corbyn's biggest fan, for a variety of reasons, from his cringing level of wokeism, to his commitment to a second referendum, things which cost Labour dearly in 2019.
Oh give over, you’re yakking on a bike forum to put off that bit of work you don’t want to start just before lunch on a Friday.
Gosh, I wasn't exaggerating when I said that you had run out of constructive argument.
Although to be fair given what you were trying to defend that comes as no great surprise
There does appear to be a correlation between how far to the left you are and the reduction in a sense of humour that occurs on a sliding scale ;o)
Right-wingers are renowned for their hilarious sense of humour, unlike lefties. Just think of all those famous right-wing comedians.
There does appear to be a correlation between how far to the left you are and the reduction in a sense of humour that occurs on a sliding scale ;o
That's not fair you've got Jim Davidson fighting your corner there.
There does appear to be a correlation between how far to the left you are and the reduction in a sense of humour that occurs on a sliding scale ;o)
I didn't know you lived in Edinburgh.
https://twitter.com/StephenFlynnSNP/status/1837069197735596530?t=Sm3CF4bD6DHkwleQLAtU9A&s=19
Comedy gold though here.
I remember a while back Ernie talking about how Keir Starmer would make a terrible PM. 2 months in his personal and party poll ratings have collapsed, he's mired in sleaze allegations, and his staff are fighting and briefing against each other. And now as we see above he's making Johnsoneque claims about stuff that hasn't even happened yet (remind anyone of the 40 hospitals?). I suppose he hasn't crashed the economy yet (give it time with Reeves' suicidal budget), but he's giving Liz Truss and Sunak a run for their money.
Yep, wait 14 years to get a Labour government and this is what you get. All those people I would argue against when they said "they are all the same", I now realise they were right.
There's an awful lot of false equivalence going on here... but it's to be expected... and it is a failure of leadership to not see this stuff coming and head it off (the football stuff being the most obvious... just pay the extra to be upgraded from stands to a box... or watch at home).
I just don't know how the country is still functioning with all the failures and scandals, i'm amazed there's not militias running the streets just now
The "scandal" that some anonymous staffers don't like Sue Gray being well paid, and some even better paid journalists are making as much out of it is possible? As boring as the campaign clothes and specs. Party funding could really put fuel on the fire of the "they're all same" bin fire though... it'll put pressure on for the reform of campaign rules I suspect, and rightly so. A maximum on individual's donations would be sound... as would a total ban on donations via offshore companies of any kind... change is required, and applied to all parties, urgently.
I just don’t know how the country is still functioning with all the failures and scandals, i’m amazed there’s not militias running the streets just now
Only a sour-faced lefty wouldn't find that funny.
Marina Hyde in "that" newspaper is on form and on Starmer today. I won't bother quoting the bits on Starmer because it would be repeating what STWers have already said above but I did like this about one of his benefactors:
As for the type of person we’re dealing with … listen, I don’t want to say Waheed Alli “divides opinion”, because you know what? This week I asked several people in the know about him to give their opinion and they all said the exactly same thing. Unfortunately, it’s a single word that we don’t use in the Guardian unless it’s in reported speech.
Ah, the naughty Guardian are at it again....
With the best glasses donor money can buy, surely Starmer can see that this week has been a total disaster
Marina Hyde
This week I asked several people in the know about him to give their opinion and they all said the exactly same thing.
It would be interesting to know who she asked, and to compare their record with his.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waheed_Alli,_Baron_Alli
I just don’t know how the country is still functioning with all the failures and scandals, i’m amazed there’s not militias running the streets just now
It is functioning exactly as it has been for the last 14 years, no better and no worse. Not sure why you are being so melodramatic about it, presumably you think Starmer is doing really well and there are no comments to be made about him on a 'UK government thread'?
Should we not be critical of Starmer for some reason?
no better and no worse
Not sure if nurses, doctors, teachers, train staff etc would agree with you.