UK Election!

That’s just political expediency.

Nah, in my book that is **** cowardice and bowing down to the likes of Mencer and his goon squad

A question: Would now be a good time to ‘grass up’ / make public some really shitty Tory behaviour around enabling the selling off of national assets which were provided for the benefit of children? Just wondering whether to speak to an appropriate journalist, or if it would be lost in the election stooshie

Because like it or not the Labour Party has had a problem with anti-Semitism recently.

Nonsense. The Labour leader before Corbyn was a Jew and it was a complete non-issue – not once was it suggested that Ed Miliband being a Jew posed any sort of problem at all.

Find me links from that period which suggests that it was. If a Jew can become the leader of the Labour Party without causing any sort of issue then anti-semitism obviously isn’t a problem.

Obviously right-wingers and newspapers such as the Daily Mail are going to make those sort of allegations but they shouldn’t be taken anymore seriously than the allegation that multiculturalism has failed.

What did occur under Corbyn was greater criticism of Israel. To suggest that this was proof of anti-semitism is no more true than Israel’s current wild allegations that the UN, the International Criminal Court, and the International Court of Justice, are all guilty of anti-semitism because they won’t approve the killing of innocent women and children.

Nah, Spill the beans Matt!

Nah, Spill the beans Matt!

I think so.

My boss doesn’t.

And my Trustees at work are divided too.

I reckon Monbiot would pick it up fast….

what we see now is exactly what we are going to get.

Is that better, the same, or worse than we currently have and have had for the past decade and a bit?

Labour have already told you that any of their promises are conditional on growth, this is the self same trickle down economics we’ve had for 50 years. Labour’s self imposed fiscal rules are identical to the Tories and can only have the same effects because of that with the addition that Rachael Reeves had made an ”ironclad” promise that will not permit public money to be spent on public investment, she has promised to pay down the deficit and the debt, which will mean less money going into the economy, not more.

Because that’s what the majority of people believe in.

Trying to explain to people that it’s not a zero sum of tax = spending. And is in fact more like tax + interest rates + inflation = spending + QE , and that even that is way too simplistic (it ignores the bond market for starters).  Even* Hunt knows that if you read his notes on the budget.  Balancing the budget does sort-of work because the other factors are either the outcomes (inflation) or have other negative consequences. You can’t just in isolation spend money.  That’s not how it works whether you subscribe to MMT or not.

We’ve had 14 years of austerity government, that’s probably in part been what’s kept interest rates low (because there has to be money being pumped in somewhere otherwise the economy stagnates) .  Liz Truss ended that by (almost) cutting taxes, which would have meant too much money floating around, which meant that interest rates had to go up.  There were winners (people who browed money ~2010) and loosers (people with debts ~2022) to that period of austerity.

In a parallel universe where Ed Miliband can eat a Bacon sandwich we might not have had all that austerity and spent our way out of the recession. But the payback for that may well have been higher interest rates.  Which may well have lead to less private sector growth (and that’s been bad enough as it is, productivity and wages have stagnated).  And would probably have meant lower house price inflation (again, winners and loosers to that).  Bit it’s a very difficult sell to an electorate that the “What would you have done differently?” Is “your house would have been worth less, mortagages would be the same, and your wages might still not have grown, but the public sector might have been better off, and the (fictional or not) debt would have been higher at least initially”.

*there’s still an element of technocracy, one way or another these people tend to be cleverer than most of us even if ideologically very different. Even if the occasional Truss or Reese-Mogg proves otherwise.

I reckon Monbiot would pick it up fast…

The Sun might pay better money! Start a bidding war with the Daily Mail. It might involve a Tory politician but they’ll pay good money if they think their rivals might get the story instead of them.

Edit: For clarity this is not a serious suggestion.

Find me links from that period which suggests that it was. If a Jew can become the leader of the Labour Party without causing any sort of issue then anti-semitism obviously isn’t a problem.

Would you confidently state that the Tory party is not racist?

But it is clear that it speaks to his political ambition

yes, he’s trying to win an election

Would you confidently state that the Tory party is not racist?

I think that we can probably find evidence of racism within the Tory Party, as indeed we can within the Labour Party – the Forde Report makes that crystal clear.

Do I believe that Rishi Sunak being brown has exposed the level of racism there is in the Tory Party? No. I think Sunak’s skin colour is fairly inconsequential with regards to his position as Tory leader.

Remember we are talking about the 2010-15 period when anti-semitism was a complete non-issue in the Labour Party (despite the fact that the Labour leader was Jewish) and the 2015-20 period when suddenly, and mysteriously, anti-semitism allegedly became a huge issue within the Labour Party.

The feasibility of that scenario isn’t great.

HM Revenue and Customs has confirmed that Angela Rayner owes no capital gains tax for the sale of her former council house and that no further action will be taken

Sorry.. which party was elected to govern the country?

That’s just a small-minded, power-grabbing mentality where you think you have to change things in reality to make a difference. What is really important is that we were on the right side of history.

What is really important is that we were on the right side of history.

Right on comrade!

Nope, getting elected is what it’s all about and get the foreman’s job at last.

Balancing the budget does sort-of work because the other factors are either the outcomes (inflation) or have other negative consequences. You can’t just in isolation spend money.  That’s not how it works whether you subscribe to MMT or not.

You don’t need to subscribe to MMT. MMT is the description of our monetary system.

A framework for analysis.

Balancing the budget means you didn’t leave any extra money in the economy which is why out of the last 45 years or so we run deficits nearly all the time. Deficits are pretty normal for many Fiat based economies.

Inflation – if created by government spending has a control measure – it’s called taxation which simply deletes money. So we have the capacity to deal with it.  (Unlike the recent inflation.)

You absolutely can spend money in isolation – because the country currently needs it, and the only time you wouldn’t consider spending loads o’ money is if we were actually at full employment.

Who do you think creates the money that we pay our taxes with; what your wages are paid by and money invested in the public sector. And also the money to purchase the bonds. Yeah it’s public money created at the BoE. Base money/reserves.

Our country fails to function without it.

If you balance a budget things tend to grind to a halt.

Country desperately needs bringing up to scratch so excusing Rachel Reeves for her appalling fiscal ‘irresponsibility’ – is not a solution or pragmatic.

We’ve had 14 years of austerity government, that’s probably in part been what’s kept interest rates low (because there has to be money being pumped in somewhere otherwise the economy stagnates)

Because there hasn’t really been austerity. The Tories are good at spending money and running up deficits. They just don’t like spending the money on the correct things. BTW the economy has stagnated for the best part of a decade.

So yeah just spending money on random things for a few select people is bad – but balancing a budget is the exact opposite of fiscal responsibility.

Even Gideon Osborne admitted that austerity was nothing to do with ‘paying off the deficit’, it was about shrinking the state and redistribution.

Forgive me on this but half the problem is senior economists don’t have a clue about the monetary system.

Here was a recent viral clip in a film about MMT with one of Biden’s senior advisors trying to explain how it works by using conventional economic language – and then sort of blaming MMT for his own ineptitude.

I know it’s a bit off topic but if the economists that make decisions can’t articulate how we do things – where do you think it leaves the economy?

Rachel Reeves is going in this direction.

Labour have already told you that any of their promises are conditional on growth, this is the self same trickle down economics we’ve had for 50 years.

I’m not disagreeing, but like I said a couple of posts ago, five weeks till the GE. If you reckon you can undo five decades of “economic authodoxy” and re-educate the great unwashed before they go to the polls crack on.

Otherwise why would Labour start a debate around “Growth” knowing they’d lose a good chunk of swing voters.

I think the problem is that this other, well to the left of centre, progressive, social-democratic party you want vote for isn’t really going to appear on many ballots. The headbangers and Rascists have plenty of choice and those of us more keen to eject the Tories than examine the current state of the PLP have made a pragmatic compromise, for now. Like all elections it’s a gamble, what we get may well not be what we wanted. But what we currently have is pretty dire too.

I know it’s a bit off topic but if the economists that make decisions can’t articulate how we do things – where do you think it leaves the economy?

I seriously doubt that guy makes any decisions without an aide assisting, as for MMT, nobody knows how it works, as it’s never been used in the wild, the theory looks good, but that was the same for communism, the weird thing is, if MMT was to work, the US is probably the best place for it to be trialled, as the $ is the greatest currency and the US have influence/power over most.

A question: Would now be a good time to ‘grass up’ / make public some really shitty Tory behaviour around enabling the selling off of national assets which were provided for the benefit of children?

We already know about HS2, but give it a try you might get some money from the press….

Loved the footage put out on the news of the Little Fella purposefully getting off a train, as if it’s something he always does. There was nobody else on said train obviously.

I’m sure he was quickly back to the helicopter and private jet

MMT Magic Money Tree for anyone who’s wondering 😋 Several countries have tried it, notably Germany after WW1 and that didn’t end too well.

Current guess for kids who will be forced out of private education by Pull-the-ladder-up Sir Kneeler is somewhere between 250,000 – 500,000, and it will be the families with the least money who are hit.

Luckily there isn’t a problem finding places at decent state schools these days.

and it will be the families with the least money who are hit.

I’d imagine if you’re sending your kids to a private school, then you’re hardly likely to be seen at a food bank any time soon

Let’s all get the really, really small violins out for those who claim they will no longer be able to afford their offsprings fees for their private education.

I’m sorry but taxpayers funding, through tax breaks, a system which simply entrenches inequality from school age and massively limits the life chances of the majority is absolutely indefensible

Current guess for kids who will be forced out of private education by Pull-the-ladder-up Sir Kneeler is somewhere between 250,000 – 500,000, and it will be the families with the least money who are hit.

Oh no……..thoughts n’ prayers.

Current guess for kids who will be forced out of private education by Pull-the-ladder-up Sir Kneeler is somewhere between 250,000 – 500,000, and it will be the families with the least money who are hit.

Luckily there isn’t a problem finding places at decent state schools these days.

Newsflash – the families with the least money aren’t going to private school, and Starmer very famously didn’t pay to go to his grammer. State schools are on their arses because Tories.

I’m sorry but taxpayers funding, through tax breaks, a system which simply entrenches inequality from school age and massively limits the life chances of the majority is absolutely indefensible

Agreed.

Although I’ve an 8.30 meeting with one of the most expensive and hope that they don’t cut back too quickly until I get paid for the work. 😉

There’s nothing like hearing a plummy received pronunciation at a snotty rag comprehensive.

Current guess for kids who will be forced out of private education by Pull-the-ladder-up Sir Kneeler is somewhere between 250,000 – 500,000, and it will be the families with the least money who are hit.

With due respect, I’d suggest that is exactly that, a guess. Several reasons – firstly, what’s the denominator? There are about 7% if UK children at private school (compared with 40-odd% in Aus, interestingly). Secondly, children’s schooling is an emotive issue and I’d expect people will scrimp and save to keep their kids in private school once they’re there (though obviously a big increase in fees will put people off). Lastly, private schools are businesses and they charge what they think the market will bear. If they don’t think the market will take a big increase they’ll cut fees, either by swallowing it or making things that are currently included extras.

The long and the short of this is that we don’t really know what the effect of VAT will be – Eton/Winchester/other bastion of privilege for the very wealthy will be fine, a provincial day school that’s already struggling probably not.

Of course we should be funding state education better (IIRC private schools have about 3x the income per pupil as state)…

I’m sure the extra VAT on school fees could be covered by not taking the nanny along to the ski holiday, or even downgrading the Range Rover lease to a Discovery lease.

We all have to make compromises in life eh?

My mate works as the secretary/receptionist in the estate agents in town (kirkcudbright), she gets folks from down south all the time asking her about the choice of private schools in the area and they are always surprised that the nearest would be 100 miles away in Glasgow/Edinburgh area, I guess the private school idea is pretty much an English thing.

I’m more comfortable with Starmer than Sunak as a future PM.

Can the bar go any lower?

@towpathman While it’s an easy line of attack, realistically the majority of people with kids at private school won’t have a nanny to take on the ski holiday, if they have a ski holiday – the fees for a private day school are much less affordable than a generation ago, it’s likely both parents are working professional jobs to cover them, and we’re largely talking secondary children who can get themselves home and let themselves in.

The wankpanzer on lease is however entirely fair criticism.

@somafunk For reasons I don’t quite follow the Scots appear to have a different attitude to this, and the proportion of kids at private schools in Scotland is lower.

Can the bar go any lower?

What are the options?

I guess the private school idea is pretty much an English thing.

Ahem, Hogwarts?

Good grief. After Jackie Walker’s history of antisemitic pronouncements and the reason for Abbott’s suspension you’d think she’d have the brains to choose different company

https://x.com/MrHarryCole/status/1795880768721531354

After 37 years in pin a red rossette on a donkey Hackney, shouldn’t she give someone else a go?

Same old Labour

The charitable staus of public schools is mainly based on their granting of subsidised places. These generally go to the children of the teachers or occasionally to the children of the impoverished but titled families to add a bit of snotty glamour.

EDIT or to kids who play unusual instruments for the school orchestra. So if you sing or play at a cathedral you get your kids trained up and they get the places.

@BillMC Again, I’m not sure that’s a stereotype borne out in reality. Maybe at Winchester, very unlikely there are distressed nobility at MGS, never mind Hulme’s Grammar School.