rogersix
Well-known member
- Jan 18, 2014
- 8,202
did you end up voting for truss?
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Politics] Liz Truss **RESIGNS 20/10/2022**
- Thread starter Ethelwulf
- Start date
did you end up voting for truss?
rogersix
Well-known member
- Jan 18, 2014
- 8,202
what makes you think that he is hoping that you march to his tune?
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
Machiavelli
Well-known member
Is it PotG?
Thrifty non-licker
Highly informative and enlightening article in The Telegraph today.
View attachment 152227
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/09/26/labour-party-dangerously-underestimating-liz-trusss-tories/
View attachment 152227
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/09/26/labour-party-dangerously-underestimating-liz-trusss-tories/
Last edited by a moderator:
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 36,014
could be, the debt is the problem and £105bn extra borrowing pencilled in.
Machiavelli
Well-known member
I’m a floating voter, latterly voting Lucas. I’m quite excited about what I’ve said all along will happen, a clean start in Dec 2024. I had that feeling in 1997 [forget his pro EU credentials much-loved on nsc …. Major was an awful leader, way out of his depth, Ken Clarke the lone star]. The only potential spanner would be a very disruptive Sturgeon, with a following of just 1.24m yet the ability to screw Starmer’s premiership over 67m souls.
With hindsight (a wonderful thing), austerity was a huge mistake. Brown also had an austerity plan at the 2010 GE, Newsnight last week reminded a Labour politician that the IFS had said at the time something like there was just a narrow margin between all the parties plans in 2010. An interesting summary with graphics here.
https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2010/apr/28/general-election-2010-spending-cuts-ifs
The cuts planned by all 2010 GE parties simply weren’t needed, when interest rates were so low. Instead, it should’ve been a Keynesian time for investment. Interestingly this was/is an international issue, Mediterranean countries are still bitter about the austerity imposed (in effect) by Germany. I think you’ve posted along those lines for a long time. I had thought the opposite, caught up in the near universal mood music at the time.
Looking forward again, I think and hope that spending will be directed into THE critical areas eg mental health, non-HS2 rail infrastructure, small nuclear power plants, the NHS (frontline only!), the restoration of closed Sure Start centres, on the NHS and similar staff wages. In a very changed environment now I can’t see the need for private railway companies and energy suppliers, but it’s not a priority. I await sarcastic [MENTION=15734]harry[/MENTION] Wilson’s tackle labelling me a Commie.
Taxation - this is where we probably differ. I don’t believe in taxing high and very high earners until the pips squeak. Not necessarily for an ideological reason, but working in the tax world, you get behavioural changes. For example legitimate tax planning, people moving overseas, or retiring early, cutting back their hours, or just not being incentivised to start that extra project, take that extra risk. I don’t believe in any marginal tax rate which is a deterrent.
Well, you're also being generous, and those that admit to changing minds aren't, how shall we put this, in the majority. I used to think I was an anarchist a long, long time ago, and I've shifted from that, but really not from too much bigger picture for a long time -- which is never a good thing. I'm for equality and inclusivity/plurality/diversity and, from there, it's just a question of how to get there (which is the difficult bit) -- with no obvious answers, all you're left with is experimentation, and the testing of those experiments, including rejecting them.
You might not have realised it, but you've described perfectly why you're centrist dad shtick is a load of old nonsense (if I may
). The centre is a myth, which gets reified. That said, the majority love the notion which, in turn, is probably informed by their wish that politics would go away, and we could all agree on anything and live happily ever after. That is never going to happen and my less than charitable view is that they haven't actually understood what politics is, and particularly in its democratic form.I agree with what you're saying about high taxation -- see Hollande's failed manouevre for instance. But that's within our current configuration, which is set up for money, assets, and accountancy tricks. So the key point Piketty and those working with him (eg Zucman) make is transparency: a wealth, asset, salary register. They have had one in Norway for a while. Those countries that do this can then form together, and develop preferential trading/diplomacy relations. From then on, higher taxation policies become viable, again especially targeting assets (rather than labour which produces value). It's already collected (to varying degrees) on illiquid, tangible assets, eg houses.
It's the only way that internationalised capital -- and the wealth extremes that it generates -- can be brought back under control by (nationally-sited) politics/democracy. I suspect progress will be slow. It's also highly unlikely in the UK, because ever since the rise of the City of London some 500 years ago, an elaborate network has been established to evade control and facilitate opacity. That won't be given up easily and, as a result, we'll remain with many of the problems we currently endure.
nicko31
Well-known member
With Trussonomics is full flow, hedge funds coining it and debt costs soaring, now attack the State.
They've really done it this time
Attachments
brightn'ove
cringe
No you don't understand, he is 'just leaving this here' because he doesn't want to engage in any sort of factual debate, he wants to believe the out of context screenshot that has been sent around by right wing sockpuppet social media accounts, and is doing their job for them by spreading the bullshit even further.
I read that. One of the most bonkers articles that the Telegraph has printed ... and that's saying something. I don't know what's the most deluded statement. That the critics of the government plans in the major banks are "hard-left" or that the Labour revival has failed to materialise (on a day when the party is 17 points ahead, according to the latest poll)
Bold Seagull
strong and stable with me, or...
What is the enlightening bit of the article? It looks like an opinion piece without any enlightened opinions. Would be interested to know what you found enlightening?
Weststander
Well-known member
Well, you're also being generous, and those that admit to changing minds aren't, how shall we put this, in the majority. I used to think I was an anarchist a long, long time ago, and I've shifted from that, but really not from too much bigger picture for a long time -- which is never a good thing. I'm for equality and inclusivity/plurality/diversity and, from there, it's just a question of how to get there (which is the difficult bit) -- with no obvious answers, all you're left with is experimentation, and the testing of those experiments, including rejecting them.
You might not have realised it, but you've described perfectly why you're centrist dad shtick is a load of old nonsense (if I may
I agree with what you're saying about high taxation -- see Hollande's failed manouevre for instance. But that's within our current configuration, which is set up for money, assets, and accountancy tricks. So the key point Piketty and those working with him (eg Zucman) make is transparency: a wealth, asset, salary register. They have had one in Norway for a while. Those countries that do this can then form together, and develop preferential trading/diplomacy relations. From then on, higher taxation policies become viable, again especially targeting assets (rather than labour which produces value). It's already collected (to varying degrees) on illiquid, tangible assets, eg houses.
It's the only way that internationalised capital -- and the wealth extremes that it generates -- can be brought back under control by (nationally-sited) politics/democracy. I suspect progress will be slow. It's also highly unlikely in the UK, because ever since the rise of the City of London some 500 years ago, an elaborate network has been established to evade control and facilitate opacity. That won't be given up easily and, as a result, we'll remain with many of the problems we currently endure.
I'd love to see a breakdown (falling apart), as far as the UK is concerned because the world aren't going to properly tackle it (although Biden, Johnson and the EU went part of the way), of the beneficial effects of tax havens. You know all the usual suspects - BVI, Bahamas, Cayman Islands, Panama, Isle of Man, Channel Islands, Monaco.
It's not a new thing under 'evil' Johnson, I know newly qualified professionals who went off the work there in the late 80's, in effect to help tax cheats ('mitigators'). It's a vast industry.
How?
By making it a criminal offence punishable by prison and hefty tax penalties to hold assets and/or yield income outside the UK, not declared on a UK tax return. Then all taxed at UK tax rates. All overseas assets to be declared through the same law.
This is far more pervasive than the usual talked about characters of Philip Green, Tory donors, oligarchs. I personally saw and wider than that know of liars worth a few £1m who were hellbent on not paying their full whack of UK tax. They're not small fry, they're in huge numbers, the sums add up. Off the radar, they like privacy to cover their back.
This might push a load of people to emigrate. So be it.
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 36,014
imo the enlightening thing is it starts "if" Truss/Kwasi policy will succeed, rather than exploring why it should succeed.
Is it PotG?
Thrifty non-licker
Indeed, therein lies the problem.
All we've heard is its the end of the world financially, we're all doomed. This fresh perspective offers up that very scenario. Still, I'm sure for all our benefit the electorate hope it will indeed succeed.
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 36,014
sounds like the US tax system. doesnt stop them using offshore tax havens.
what is being suggested is taxing wealth, which sounds good until you realise that means assets getting sold off to meet tax demands. that may be the intent, devaluing assets or breaking up businesses.
From the Guardian: "The Japanese bank Nomura now expects the pound to slide below parity with the dollar, to $0.95 by the first quarter of next year, and acidly notes: “Hope is not a strategy.”"
Is it PotG?
Thrifty non-licker
The Guardian is hardly one to make a stand firmly behind it, is it?
Wardy's twin
Well-known member
- Oct 21, 2014
- 8,866
that's brilliant
Nobby Cybergoat
Well-known member
- Jul 19, 2021
- 8,622
Today, UK five-year gilts are trading at a yield of 4.3% – higher than Greece (4%), or Italy (4%)
Nice one Lizzie
Nice one Lizzie