So, for example, in the case of Boris Johnson’s 40 new hospitals

Yeah that about the gist of it. If you spend without the resources and labour being available, the result is higher prices due to the mechanics of supply and demand. The argument around govt spending is that the availability of funds is never the thing that stops something happening. Then it becomes a question of political priorities. Instead of asking ‘where is the money coming from’ (as Emily Thornberry is doing right now on Sky news), labour could/should be making the argument for redeploying resources from one place to another to benefit the whole of society rather than a few shareholders.

They should also be making the case that tax is a tool to be used for political ends, rather than needing it to pay for things. So by all means lets have a windfall tax on oil and gas companies, but not because we need the money, but because it’s fair and just. I don’t know why that’s such a difficult or risky argument to make.

Governments can create more money. But if they create too much, then it becomes less valuable.

Well not really, our currency is Fiat and not pegged to anything – the value is determined by the buyers and sellers on global markets.

If people have too much money, then they can pay more for other things that are of restricted supply (which is most things – food, oil, cars etc) so then everyone needs a pay rise to pay for it – which is ok, cos everyone has lots of pounds, so then they can all afford to pay more, so prices go up again.

Currently we have no growth or little growth – there isn’t enough money for consumers by way of example.

Also when the government spends it doesn’t necessarily go into circulation all at once. So you can generate loads of money and if it went to one person who put it all in a bank for argument’s sake – the net affect of inflation is zero.

Therefore the act of creating money is not inflationary. What happens to it afterwards could be. That’s a key distinction.

So, for example, in the case of Boris Johnson’s 40 new hospitals, they are no doubt needed and the Government could create the money to build them, but you would need to have the builders, equipment and raw materials available in the economy to facilitate the build, thus spending the money?

100%

And the political will to do it.

But you don’t need to raise taxes. That’s exactly how it operates currently, and since the 70s.

@rone and @dazh

Thank you.

No problem – sorry some of my messages are scrappy/typo’d jumping about on a phone between jobs.

One other thing – the actual limit is governed by resources not £££.

Look at energy – limited resource – price goes up.

(Very cleanly explained by DazH up there! – didn’t spot that.)

Truss: We’ll cut taxes to help business

Starmer: We’re the party of working people.

The ‘working man’ (as it was) has moved on though – it’s middle-class family now with a BMW and MINI parked outside a new-build. He’s got two years to make some progress and he’s showing few signs of doing so.

The “party of working people” is so bloody cynical. They should represent those that lack the means which is a wider band of society than just working people.

They will never beat “For the many not the few.”

Ah I watched 10 mins of Starmer v Truss – spent all the time going on about ‘how will we pay for it.’ I knew this would become their position.

Seriously shut up – and protect the consumers first. He sounds like a Tory he really does.

protect the consumers first

Er… that really isn’t the battle ahead. Labour have already helped push the government into a position where “protection” for consumers is coming this winter. There is no way Truss can avoid a quick fix on household energy bills. The effort now is to stop that money just disappearing upwards via energy company profits. Get it back, spend it where it is needed.

Er… that really isn’t the battle ahead. Labour have already helped push the government into a position where “protection” for consumers is coming this winter. There is no way Truss can avoid a quick fix on household energy bills. The effort now is to stop that money just disappearing upwards via energy company profits

That is not the effort by a long shot until people in energy poverty have money against their bills.

Labour were arguing about the where the money was too come from just minutes ago.

NO ONE cares where the money is coming from if you’re in energy poverty. They should actually be arguing for more funds as it isn’t quite enough.

You have moved the debate sideways which is fine, but not the priority and Starmer has completely missed the boat as usual by talking about pay-for.

So with respect in practical terms you are wrongly positioned in the debate.

If they focussed only on the “help”, which will be coming, you would be saying how easily they would be outflanked when that helps comes. The focus now is making sure the Tories don’t just use this opportunity to funnel the money upwards… and if they do, to make sure everyone knows that they have. Just as with VIP lanes for Covid, the fact that the government is throwing money around isn’t enough… follow that money…

The focus now is making sure the Tories don’t just use this opportunity to funnel the money upwards… and if they do, to make sure everyone knows that they have. Just as with VIP lanes for Covid, the fact that the government is throwing money around isn’t enough… follow that money…

That’s not the focus if you’ve turned the energy off to save money.

The focus is on delivering the support.

I’m happy to wait until Thursday to see what the actual plan is. Let’s stop jumping the gun? It’s not helpful.

Let’s stop jumping the gun?

It is Truss who has jumped the gun by ruling out taxing the money back out of the companies making huge profits out of this crisis. I suspect she’ll have to eventually uturn on that, but she won’t if the opposition parties take the advice to “seriously shut up” in the face of what the PM has already said about her response. She needs shaming into something like a windfall tax. As a minimum.

Labour were handing them 29 billion just for a shorter period and you need to know only 8billion of that was covered by windfall tax.

It’s a load of rubbish Kelvin.

Fully funded Kelvin.

They are using the exact same mechanism and some magic accounting.

you need to know only 8billion of that was covered by windfall tax

I do know that. An extra 8billion. Partly by closing the gaping loophole that Sunak put in place for the fossil fuel companies to “encourage” them to extract more. Sort of a climate change promotion bonus. See… it’s not just that the government stand to make the rich even richer, they also want to push increased reliance on fossil fuel. This isn’t just about money, its about direction for the energy sector, our country and planet. And Truss is sending us the wrong way, fast, and that needs calling out.

Why won’t she increase the windfall tax and close the loophole? Does she think companies will just stop extracting from North Sea fields? No, they won’t… she’s looking to use this crisis to funnel money and power to the fossil fuel industry and away from “green crap” at exactly the time we should be weakening their hold on us.

The IEA have their woman in number 10… watch her carefully… she’s not in there for us.

Labour should talk about the Tories corruption and profligacy. They should talk about the Tories borrowing more and paying back less into the exchequer historically. They can talk about the massivley increased deficit under the Tories and how austerity didn’t work in any way. They have to show that the Tories are worse with money than Labour are.

They don’t need to say “where is the money coming from?” to do this.

Sir Keir Starmer in his tribute to QE2 earlier today described her as the greatest monarch ever, which I thought sounded like a bit of an exaggeration bearing in mind all the past monarchs such as QE1.

And after all QE2 inherited an empire and died leaving us with none.

And after all QE2 inherited an empire and died leaving us with none.

That’s a good thing, in my opinion.

Having an economic plan (no matter how messy) versus no economic plan.

📊 Who can best build a strong economy?

🔵 Liz Truss 41% (+5)*
🔴 Keir Starmer 33% (-2)

*Compared to Johnson

Via @RedfieldWilton, 18 Sep (+/- since 3 July)

— Stats for Lefties 🍉🏳️‍⚧️ (@LeftieStats) September 21, 2022

No PMQs, again, today. She can’t run forever…

Having an economic plan (no matter how messy) versus no economic plan.

Maybe he’s saving it for the conference? We know what it will be anyway, something that looks like Osbornian austerity combined with a bit of Brownian tax and spend targeted in specific places. In other words tinkering around the edges to give the impression of radical change whilst not really changing anything at all.

Truss doesn’t have a plan beyond tax breaks linked to increasing the use of fossil fuels, and bribes for well off backers and voters. Investing in green energy, including on-shore, and increasing energy efficiency, are still part of Labour’s plan. Truss is getting her bounce because she is doing everything she can to avoid scrutiny of her non-plan, and she has plenty of help there. And not just from the allies you expect. 😉

Starmer handled her empty words well at the last PMQs. Since then she’s happily kept well away from parliament and cancelled interviews with any journalist up to the task of asking her questions. She can’t stay in the fridge forever… but perhaps she can stay in there for much of the time left ’till an election (whenever that might be)? Perhaps that’s “the plan”? Avoid scrutiny, and hope that everyone blames Starmer for the mess her government(s) are getting us in.

Germany has nationalised the countries largest gas supplier to deal with the energy crisis. Is Starmer still sticking his fingers in his ears to drown out the obvious message.

Starmer isn’t PM, and isn’t likely to be at this rate. If people had voted Labour into office, they would be reacting to this crisis in similar ways to Germany (and France and…) in terms of taking ownership in return for the bailout money, but they didn’t… did they… they gave the Tories a majority to give money to the rich and divest rather than invest in publicly owned assets. Get the Tories out, or keep beating on the opposition for not being in power, so getting nothing done, and treading too carefully because they are trying to get people who have been voting Tory (or not at all, or ignoring FPTP and wasting their vote) to vote for them.

Truss doesn’t have a plan beyond tax breaks linked to increasing the use of fossil fuels, and bribes for well off backers and voters. Investing in green energy, including on-shore, and increasing energy efficiency, are still part of Labour’s plan.

Like it or not she has a plan.

Has Starmer said anything about the cap on banker’s bonuses?

keep beating on the opposition for not being in power

The Opposition has been criticised for not providing opposition. No one has criticised the Opposition for not being in power, as you well know.

Has Starmer said anything about the cap on banker’s bonuses?

Yes he has said that the measure would be “pro-rich”. Not much more I think, he appears to be leaving criticism of the proposal to those who can make the case more eloquently than him:

https://inews.co.uk/news/business/critics-attack-plan-scrap-bankers-pay-cap-millions-struggle-1859426

And not just from the allies you expect.

Bless. I dont recall you criticising binners for his moronic “down the allotment” drivel. Or is that not the allies for the tories you are thinking of?

Avoid scrutiny, and hope that everyone blames Starmer for the mess her government(s) are getting us in.

Yeah I dont know where they might have got that idea from. I take it is okay to blame Corbyn for brexit etc though or will you be taking an equally hardcore line against the labour centrists who take that line?

Or is that not the allies for the tories you are thinking of?

I suspect he’s not so much alluding to those criticising Starmer as opposed to those bigging up Truss. Even Binners never blew smoke up BJ’s arse the way some seem to with our incumbent Puppet Moron.

She has a cunning plan, don’t you know. Just don’t ask to see it.

I like to nip in from time to time to see I’m still contributing to the thread while not contributing to the thread.

Carry on…

I suspect he’s not so much alluding to those criticising Starmer as opposed to those bigging up Truss.

Like Guardian comment writers?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/sep/07/liz-trusss-first-pmqs-was-no-triumph-but-she-avoided-catastrophe

“For any new prime minister, the first question is: are they up to it? And Liz Truss clearly is. She looked like a prime minister, she performed reasonably well, and she even managed a decent joke.”

Dismissing Truss as a puppet moron might be fun but it isn’t a constructive way to deal with someone who has both immense power and the immense capability of causing huge damage.

There is no evidence that Truss is currently failing in what is undoubtedly her agenda – to shift the UK in a more right-wing direction and serve the interests of the wealthy elite.

You might laugh and ridicule at her alleged inaptitude but it is her who is in the driving seat, it is her who is choosing which road to go down, and by the time she does eventually crash who knows how much the wealthy elite will have benefited from her premiership.

A misplaced sense of intellectual superiority is poor compensation for years of unrestrained and unchallenged Tory rule imo. It almost seems as a form of hysteria to me – a reassuring comfort blanket for those struggling to face reality.

Wowsers.

“Years of unrestrained and unchallenged Tory rule” is exactly the problem.

Step 1 of the solution should be straight forward enough.

I suspect he’s not so much alluding to those criticising Starmer as opposed to those bigging up Truss. Even Binners never blew smoke up BJ’s arse the way some seem to with our incumbent Puppet Moron.

You see – a few posters on here only want allow political debate that enforces their values. I mean they’re mis-judged Guardian rehashes but none of us are perfect.

Fact is so much was said about Truss being a walking disaster they’ve yet again stock-piled stupidity before it all fell into place.

They can’t come to terms with the fact she hasn’t turned out as much as a super clown as their expected caricature.

On the ground she’s implemented some support for the the energy market (when they said she wouldn’t) – for now it doesn’t matter that it’s a bung to the energy suppliers – they were going to get YOUR money anyway. May as well be the government cash. (And trust me Q/E backed spending is on the cards so it won’t be ever be tax payer’s money.)

They also said she would be a disaster at PMQs and when she wasn’t the liberals cited her as boring and dull. (Listen to my mate Dunt. He’s the king of suprised centrist.)

Truss is now experiencing a poll bounce because Starmer’s plan for energy was not enough. That was well within his power to improve. And the fact they tried to justify it as being fiscally prudent was even more ridiculous. (It wasn’t fully funded anyway. It was magical accounting.) The Tories plan is actually better based on purity of government financing. (Tax should come on the producers but hey they’re Tories.)

Also certain members on here are now talking up borrowing and tax cutting without being informed about how any of it works. I mean the financing hasn’t actually been described yet but Binners’ kids are apparently paying for it.

Talk of the national debt shouldn’t be on the lips of Labour voters in this way. It means future Labour government’s won’t be able to spend to improve society.

You can say all this and still despise what the Tories stand for because you’re merely observing what Truss is doing successfully to gain power.

Imagine a world where your guy can’t get the upper hand of the clown you thought was going to be a farce?

That’s the world of the frustrated pretend leftie.

Eventually though the Tories will implode and a good Labour party could be ready. But we don’t have that either. That’s the real disappointment – not Tories being Tories.

“We’re now allowing bankers bonuses”

“The rest of you, don’t ask for above inflation pay rises”

Yeah, going just swimmingly isn’t it? You’re deluded.

Eventually though the Tories will implode and a good Labour party could be ready. But we don’t have that either.

Took almost 20 years last time and they lost against a very good opponent as Blair had exactly what was required at exactly the right time. Starmer doesn’t have 10% of what Blair had (the selling power or the timing)

I see that Starmer wants to send out a clear message concerning what sort of party the Labour Party is – deeply patriotic. Not only must its members be totally committed to a military alliance dominated by the United States of America but they are also expected to stand up and sing the praises of His Majesty Charlie Windsor :

https://www.thenational.scot/news/22312893.labour-conference-sing-god-save-king-break-tradition/

What a great way to unite the whole Party…… forcing leftie republicans to stand, or sit, as Conference erupts into an arousing rendition glorifying inherited power and wealth.

And also what a great place to do it – Liverpool, allegedly the most anti-royalist place in Britain:

https://www.liverpoolworld.uk/news/republicans-outnumber-monarchists-in-parts-of-liverpool-3716825?amp

I look forward to seeing the spectacle of a party formed by organised working people to challenge the establishment on their behalf, declare their undying commitment to the very pillar of the establishment.

And let’s not forget that current leader of the Opposition, just like our current Prime Minister, once called for the abolition of the monarchy:

So that’s at least two things Liz Truss and Keir Starmer have in common, both are shameless careerists and both once called for the abolition of the monarchy.

Truss leads Starmer by 7% in the Red Wall.

At this moment, which of the following do Red Wall voters think would be the better PM for the UK? (19-20 September)

Liz Truss 40% (+8)
Keir Starmer 33% (-6)
Don't Know 27% (-2)

Changes +/- 4 Septemberhttps://t.co/zuxVnswR3k pic.twitter.com/7iUPTZH1M3

— Redfield & Wilton Strategies (@RedfieldWilton) September 21, 2022

What? But Truss is an absolute catastroF*** ERG nutter clown that’s going to collapse within 1 week of being elected.

We’ve had no politics* and a new PM playing a key role in a week long all consuming patriotic event. Of course she has a bounce in certain North of England seats.

[ * well, no opposition politics … plenty of newspaper op-eds saying how everything is now okay ]

Wonder how the end of the fracking ban will go down in those seats? What happens when the earthquakes restart?

“We’re now allowing bankers bonuses”

“The rest of you, don’t ask for above inflation pay rises”

Yeah, going just swimmingly isn’t it? You’re deluded.

Yeah don’t you just hate that. It’s almost have having neoliberal parties gives people no options.

We’ve had no politics* and a new PM playing a key role in a week long all consuming patriotic event. Of course she has a bounce in certain North of England seats.

We’ve had loads of poliltics. Just no PMQs. Besides it’s the energy handout – it was always going to be so. And it’s being implemented quickly. Truss is not stupid in doing the thing to keep her going.

Wonder how the end of the fracking ban will go down in those seats?

We/they will just vote with their pockets – who can blame them?

What happens when the earthquakes restart?

Lol at this – near where I live Ollerton – is (Was?) already the earthquake capital of the UK https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-25824615