Love the longer hair Rachel and the smiles!

vegansrock

EU countries may be in the doldrums but are still doing better than us.

There still seems to be a national pride in countries like France, Germany, and Austria. They are still proud to be who they are and do their best to preserve their culture, language, food, etc. Britain has always been a bit of a hotch potch country and now it just seems to have gone to far. Who are we actually now? We can't hang on to our values for much longer as they are disappearing into the rear view mirror of history. Once the last of the baby boomers has gone, they will have their 'new' world!

Rosie51

Wyllow are you saying that broken manifesto pledges only count if it's something you're concerned about? Personally I wish they had campaigned on a manifesto of fair but necessary tax rises whether that be NI, VAT, income or other fiscal changes, but then I prefer honesty. Only a fool could possibly believe that the mess austerity got us into was going to be solved by more of the same. I voted Labour, I'm in serious danger of having 'buyers remorse'.

Rosie51, are you saying that when information changes, particularly when information was kept from you and those who should have been accurately informed, as the OBR should have been, you may not change the promises you made on what turned out to be other people deliberate lies?

Once the last of the baby boomers has gone, they will have their 'new' world!

The boomers don't all share one opinion!

Long hair and smiles!!!
She is about to do a complete U-turn on her own promises not to increase taxes. She is completely out of her depth as Chancellor. You only have to listen to the businessmen of this country to see what a mess she is making.
Yes, OP, Reeves is smiling. She has the poor beleaguered taxpayer in her sights.

DaisyAnneReturns

^Once the last of the baby boomers has gone, they will have their 'new' world!^

The boomers don't all share one opinion!

I like the new world, I'd like more of it. Never been interested in patriotism.

MaizieD

Allira

Cutting spending depresses the economy.

Oh! We agree!
😀

I apologise for misinterpreting your response to fancythat. I thought you were agreeing with the cutting spending so it was puzzling that you then said about spending stimulating the economy🤔

You’re certainly right that no-one will agree with her.

Your posts about the economy don't go entirely unheeded!
🙂

Oreo

I expect you would say, just print lots of money MaizieD as it’s your go to.
Massive inflation ensuing.
There seems to be a strange theory that anyone who isn’t really wealthy is struggling to make ends meet, that must be why coffee shops are bursting at the seams, nail bars and hairdressers are full of customers and shops are full of people buying shedloads of Christmas decs.
I don’t have much money to spare but would gladly pay more tax for improved services as should we all.

I expect you would say, just print lots of money MaizieD as it’s your go to.
Massive inflation ensuing.

I’m beginning to characterise this as the ‘Pavlov’s dogs’ response. Any mention of a government’s role as the sole creator of money in a national economy elicits an automatic ‘money printing equals hyperinflation’ response. It is actually economic b*llocks, but it’s so much easier to just trot out the nonsense than to try and find out if it’s true or not.

WRT coffee shops and nail bars bursting at the seams we also have pubs and restaurants struggling because people aren’t spending money like they used to, especially as prices have risen substantially. So, where does the truth lie?

14 million people in the UK are living in poverty. That is 20% of the population. Private debt in the UK has reached £2trillion. While a significant proportion of that will be mortgage debt it also represents a great many maxed out credit cards and people who cannot exist on their incomes alone. I wouldn’t be too complacent about people’s ability to absorb a tax rise.

Sarnia

Long hair and smiles!!!
She is about to do a complete U-turn on her own promises not to increase taxes. She is completely out of her depth as Chancellor. You only have to listen to the businessmen of this country to see what a mess she is making.
Yes, OP, Reeves is smiling. She has the poor beleaguered taxpayer in her sights.

Same old, same old.

to repeat: its valid to criticise for example a pledge broken to deliver this or that on the NHS or Benefits or Renter's rights

But when it comes to the economy, you know surely that finance and business is now international, we have limited control over what the UK can ever do, these days.

Really, really dont see a problem with a chancellor needing to change a pledge made early in 2024 who has to take in current circumstances

surely it would be wrong if they did not adapt to new circumstances?

Common sense...

Wyllow3

Sarnia

Long hair and smiles!!!
She is about to do a complete U-turn on her own promises not to increase taxes. She is completely out of her depth as Chancellor. You only have to listen to the businessmen of this country to see what a mess she is making.
Yes, OP, Reeves is smiling. She has the poor beleaguered taxpayer in her sights.

Same old, same old.

to repeat: its valid to criticise for example a pledge broken to deliver this or that on the NHS or Benefits or Renter's rights

But when it comes to the economy, you know surely that finance and business is now international, we have limited control over what the UK can ever do, these days.

Really, really dont see a problem with a chancellor needing to change a pledge made early in 2024 who has to take in current circumstances

surely it would be wrong if they did not adapt to new circumstances?

Common sense...

The problem is that 'current circumstances' are no different now from the circumstances that existed in July 2024 when Labour took over. Reeves has done nothing which would alter them. A little tinkering around the edges with the imposition of VAT on private schools, raising employers NI contributions and the WFA debacle has done nothing to help her achieve her unnecessary 'fiscal rule', while the 'fiscal rule' itself is putting a brake on measures which she could take to grow the economy and to achieve a more equable distribution of wealth; stopping the already wealthy hoovering up the already limited amount of money which the government spends into the economy.

But again, I would stress, she is following the same neoliberal economics that any other party in government would follow.

And, if she were to lose her job after a disastrous budget anyone who succeeded her would do just the same.

Sigh I realise that Maizie, my point was general, ie, economic circumstances are not one that full pledges can be made on.

I know your approach and actually part agree with a modified Keynesian solution: borrow for growth - I did do economics courses at Uni: but that was when national governments had a far far greater control over their own economies than we do now.

But most people including many GN's really don't understand enough to fully agree or disagree with you. its not something as a L Party campaigner I can easily take to the doorstep.

I don’t think you know enough about GNers and their ability to understand Wyllow3
There’s a place for quantitative easing where ‘ printing money’ is concerned but it should only be done now and then and governments who overdo it really do get rampant inflation as a result.
We need to pay more tax however unpalatable that may be.

I do think that current circumstances have definitely changed since July 2024.

We have the defence budget which has risen existentially.

We have a global slowdown.

Trade protectionism is on the rise

All had a recent impact on the U.K. economy.

Oreo

I don’t think you know enough about GNers and their ability to understand Wyllow3
There’s a place for quantitative easing where ‘ printing money’ is concerned but it should only be done now and then and governments who overdo it really do get rampant inflation as a result.
We need to pay more tax however unpalatable that may be.

Do you realise that in every single country in the world that has a 'sovereign currency', i.e is independent of any sort of monetary union with another country or countries, (as is the EU eurozone) is the sole issuer of its money? Banks are able , under licence from the government, to create money by making loans, but the repayment of the loan plus interest, in effect removes more than the loan money from the economy. The only way that the money supply can be permanently increased, to accommodate a rising population and people's savings is by the state spending its created money into the economy and running a deficit. Taxation's primary purpose is to control the amount of money in the economy to prevent inflation.

So one has to ask, knowing that money creation via state spending is what all countries with a sovereign currency do, why, by your critera (state money creation will cause rampant inflation) why most of these countries run more or less stable economies?

QE is extra state money creation. Whether or not it is inflationary depends on how it is allocated. without it in 2008 a great many people would have found their bank accounts suddenly empty. During the pandemic a great many people would not have been paid to compensate for lost wages and, the domestic economy would have struggled because people wouldn't have had enough money to buy anything. All in all, in response to the GFC, the pandemic (and, to a lesser extent, Brexit), the government issued some £900billion of extra money to keep the economy moving.

We can criticise both episodes of QE in some respects, such as the way the major beneficiaries of both were the wealthy but neither of them were overly inflationary.

Hyperinflation requires a coming together of a number of factors, factors which don't normally apply to a well run economy. It's easy to find research and analysis on line relating to countries which have experienced hyper inflation and to compare their circumstances with more stable economies.

But most people including many GN's really don't understand enough to fully agree or disagree with you. its not something as a L Party campaigner I can easily take to the doorstep.

I do appreciate that problem, Wyllow. There is no way I would attempt any thing other than 'orthodoxy' on the doorstep. OTOH, I would struggle to defend a government's economic illiteracy.

I think I said exactly what you have MaizieD in that QE needs to be done in the right way.

Oreo

I think I said exactly what you have MaizieD in that QE needs to be done in the right way.

I expect you would say, just print lots of money MaizieD as it’s your go to
Massive inflation ensuing.

I'm talking about more than QE, though, since you criticised me for calling for more government spending (which involves money creation as taxation comes after spending, it doesn't fund it).

The speech was to me warning of more doom and gloom and of course all the problems have been inherited. Why is it that political parties make all the promises in their manifesto and then claim that they didn't know about the problems. How can anyone make a promise and yet have no apparent knowledge of circumstances that could affect their claims.

Never mind at least DaisyAnneReturns loves her![
.

Chocolatelovinggran

DaisyAnne, your post resonated with me.
I have family in Norway, and feel that there is a general consensus that the people are " in it together", and are comfortable with their high- tax, good - welfare life. My SIL has done work for one of the wealthiest men in the country, who pays an eye- watering amount of tax, but is sure that his government uses it wisely. He says that " only wimps don't pay tax"

Interestingly, everyone’s tax records are publicly available in Norway.

Hi

Not only has the 22billion deficit never been proven it’s actually been disproven

Hi, I’m not sure why this government jumped in and made rash decisions! If they were looking to cut the winter fuel allowance for example why didn’t they just say it was something that is being looked at and then think about it!! I would have thought the main people to look at are ex pats especially those who live in warmer climates. They reversed the decision for now but are still looking at ways to cut most pensioners from receiving it eventually. Another thing I would look at is pension credit. Why should you get the fuel allowance if you get that benefit? It’s worth about£400 every 4 weeks. Surely those who get that benefit should be the first to lose the winter fuel allowance if it gets stopped. I get the state pension but my private pension takes me £1500 a year over the £12600 threshold so did not get the fuel allowance last year but my friend got the pension credit and fuel allowance and anything that comes with benefits. I really don’t understand why benefits can’t be looked at more closely and not just for pensioners, young people who don’t work and are just enjoying a free life really are annoying.,

SaxonGrace

Not only has the 22billion deficit never been proven it’s actually been disproven

Interesting.

Anniebach

How can the legacy of the disastrous conservative government of 14 years be solved

Talking of legacies, I'm still recoiling from the prior 13 years of the Blair/Brown government - the one that culminated in the note declaring "Good luck - there's no money left". That's what the Tories inherited!

I always enjoy MaisieD’s posts and I’m in awe of her knowledge of economics, but I’m confused as to why a country could become effectively bankrupt because global investors lose confidence in its government policy and it’s currency becomes so devalued as to be effectively worthless internationally. Iceland, Argentina, Greece, etc. Why do countries need loans from the IMF if they can simply just print their own money endlessly? I can see that a government can spend what it likes internally by effectively printing its own money, but if globally it’s economic policy is seen as unsound and its currency is worthless then it can’t pay for it’s imports .Obviously Iceland, Greece, Argentina, etc continue to exist and have recovered, but I can’t see how QE and excessive government spending work if other countries have no confidence in that country’s policies I am a bit economically illiterate but perhaps someone can explain this in simple terms.