[Politics] Liz Truss **RESIGNS 20/10/2022**

[Guinness Boy]

True, but that's only because their views were useful to a bunch of hedge fund millionaires.

Absolutely.

 

[happypig]

And there are dark clouds coming in the property market. In BTL not being able to offset mortgage interest was OK with 2% rate but with 6% rates the business model will be on its arse, especially for JCL's

Prices are going to fall and the blame will be on the government, Labour will milk it

BTL landlords are amongst the last people I will be shedding a tear for, using renters to buy a property for them.

 

[Seagull27]

trouble with him keeping his cards close to his chest and not actually stating much in the way of what his policies are/would be is that it makes one wonder if he actually has any or if indeed he knows what he would do. It’s a fairly simple job standing in the side lines saying the government have got it all wrong and they should do this or that.

Let's wait and see. Starmer is an intelligent man, I'd be amazed if they hadn't got a set of policies ready to be written into a manifesto at a moment's notice. But there's little benefit to them shouting about policies now when a) they could be stolen by the Tories, b) there's more time for the media to dig holes and form a narrative, and c) they could be forgotten about, or become less relevant between now and the next election.

 

[A1X]

But would this necessarily be a good thing?

A strong, credible opposition is every bit as important as an effective government.

Over a single term I don't think it's much of a problem, as the new Government will obviously also be finding it's own feet and need time to grow into the role. However if it lasts too far you get that same Government becoming complacent and taking decisions which it would struggle to justify if the opposition was stronger. Blair and Iraq and Thatcher and the Poll Tax both good examples of this.

 

[Audax]

I think that tinge of green is incredibly important. Reducing energy usage via insulation and energy efficiency is important, as is pivoting to renewable energy and energy storage solutions. To have a government that is actively hampering these efforts is an act of self-harm that should not be easily forgiven.

I agree. In my view, the route to economic growth for the UK in the future is not through tired old "trickle down" policies aimed at trying to increase investment in our existing economy. That economy is tapped out - there's no slack in the labour market, and it's been no better than drifting along for the last decade already.

What we need to do is encourage restructuring of the economy to put us on the best possible footing for the future. We need to invest in emerging green technologies, insulate ourselves from the inevitable crash in the fossil-fuel economy. The shift is going to happen, the sooner the UK orients its economy growth that way the better.

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

BTL landlords are amongst the last people I will be shedding a tear for, using renters to buy a property for them.

Hopefully many will go bust reducing the market price.

Investment can go up or down. About time they went down.

 

[deletebeepbeepbeep]

Looks like the mini budget is being thrown out other than-

- relaxation of stamp duty
- changes to nics
- energy guarantee to be rejigged so that it is means tested in year 2?

Since she has been banging on about the energy price guarantee as being a central element of her budget and leadership campaign surely she will have to stand down? It seems that it was too costly and was leaving a bigger deficit in the budget than previously estimated.

 

[beorhthelm]

I agree. In my view, the route to economic growth for the UK in the future is not through tired old "trickle down" policies aimed at trying to increase investment in our existing economy. That economy is tapped out - there's no slack in the labour market, and it's been no better than drifting along for the last decade already.

What we need to do is encourage restructuring of the economy to put us on the best possible footing for the future. We need to invest in emerging green technologies, insulate ourselves from the inevitable crash in the fossil-fuel economy. The shift is going to happen, the sooner the UK orients its economy growth that way the better.

curious if the labour market has no slack for the old ways, how will there be slack for new ways? presumably there are the industries and business we're going to close, who's telling anyone about this?

 

[Audax]

Looks like the mini budget is being thrown out other than-

- relaxation of stamp duty
- changes to nics
- energy guarantee to be rejigged so that it is means tested in year 2?

Yep. And for the bits that stay:

- Stamp duty: already implemented, so very hard to reverse (and sell the reverse) at this point.
- NICs: already passed with Labour support, so again hard to reverse and sell.
- Energy guarantee: very difficult to change it for year 1 given the year 1 support is already rolling, so changes for year 2 only make sense. Having said that, changing it now (when we don't know what outlook for this time next year will be yet - a lot depends on international factors yet to play out) feels a bit like "we'll make changes to help stabilise the markets, but odds are it'll be changed again in 9-12 months time".

 

[Change at Barnham]

What makes it worse for the Tories is that the financial impact of their policies haven't hit most people yet.
In a few months the renewing of fixed rate mortgages will happen, the increased energy bills (even after subsidies), food costs, inflation, strikes etc, etc.
Wait until people realise they can't afford to go on holiday, go out for curry and a pint, or afford to buy tickets for entertainment or sport. Currently people are only reading about or noticing that things are getting a bit more expensive.

The Tories nightmare hasn't yet happened, which is why if they stick with Truss they will get blown out of the water at the next election.

Keep her there.
#InLizWeTruss

 

[beorhthelm]

Looks like the mini budget is being thrown out other than-

- relaxation of stamp duty
- changes to nics
- energy guarantee to be rejigged so that it is means tested in year 2?

Since she has been banging on about the energy price guarantee as being a central element of her budget and leadership campaign surely she will have to stand down? It seems that it was too costly and was leaving a bigger deficit in the budget than previously estimated.

well that makes no sense, means testing energy cap destroys everyone above the arbitary threshold. the whole point of this energy tariff cap was suppose to be the energy providers borrowing with guarantees, not the full amount landing on the government balance sheet. we've never actually seen the details though.

 

[Audax]

curious if the labour market has no slack for the old ways, how will there be slack for new ways? presumably there are the industries and business we're going to close, whose telling anyone about this?

You'll have a transition period even if the Trusster**** government has the balls to go for it. Initially it'd be driven by R&D, and supporting start-ups getting into the relevant sectors to build that new economy. Both fairly low-labour in comparison to existing mature segments of the economy. Once you have the foundations of the new green-conscious economy laid, you'll then find a period where you see labour flowing from the old, dying industries into the new, growing industries.

It's very much a long-term view. But then, so was trickle down (except we know trickle down doesn't work, especially not trussonomics-style big-bang trickle down).

 

[rogersix]

Absolutely my take as well. Only way forward is now to take the defeat and come back stronger. Whole party needs to look at what the members want as there is a massive disconnect between members and MPs which is not good for democracy.

I really wouldn't be surprised if the Tories lose by so much that half the current MPs lose their seats which may be no bad thing in the long run.

At that stage, don't be surprised of Boris comes back as a very effective opposition leader. It's the easiest job in the world and he would do it very effectively.

it was all very sensible until the last bit, have i been whooshed?

he'll probably be annihalated in two years, but will he even stand? he's hardly a conviction politician, he's a world class money grubber

 

[vegster]

BTL landlords are amongst the last people I will be shedding a tear for, using renters to buy a property for them.

A work colleague has a friend that has just been told her rent is going up by £300 a month. Looks like they are just going to pass the cost on to the tenant...

 

[BenGarfield]

If you’re preparing a large sixth form essay I’d strongly counsel you that no one on here will a) read it or b) give a shiny shit.

If it’s something that “just is”, like breathing, then you don’t need to keep mentioning it.

It’s not though, is it? It’s a discredited pseudo science that has to have very certain conditions to “just be”, cannot be backed by a mathematical model, urges the printing of additional money (great idea right now, not) and is, for the last time a THEORY and not fact. The T in the title is a giveaway

I`ll keep it brief - MMT has not been discredited - please give evidence of this. MMT is a school of economic thought. All of economics is a pseudoscience in that sense as economic is a social science unlike chemistry or physics. MMT does not propose the unlimited printing of addtional money - where did you get that idea from? Some elements of MMT are undisputable observable facts or can be deduced from simple logic. For example, banks and the central government do create money out of thin air by keystrokes on a computer, and tax does not fund government spending in the UK as citizens must have money in their pockets first before they can pay tax, and the money of course is produced by the government or their agents, the banks. Also, yes I agree maybe MMT should have been called something else like modern monetary description but in addtion to the purely descriptive stuff, Professor Bill Mitchell and others have done a lot of work on issues like the need for a job guarantee and unemployment buffer stocks etc which involve a lot of theoretical work.

 

[Guinness Boy]

I`ll keep it brief - MMT has not been discredited - please give evidence of this. MMT is a school of economic thought. All of economics is a pseudoscience in that sense as economic is a social science unlike chemistry or physics. MMT does not propose the unlimited printing of addtional money - where did you get that idea from? Some elements of MMT are undisputable observable facts or can be deduced from simple logic. For example, banks and the central government do create money out of thin air by keystrokes on a computer, and tax does not fund government spending in the UK as citizens must have money in their pockets first before they can pay tax, and the money of course is produced by the government or their agents, the banks. Also, yes I agree maybe MMT should have been called something else like modern monetary description but in addtion to the purely descriptive stuff, Professor Bill Mitchell and others have done a lot of work on issues like the need for a job guarantee and unemployment buffer stocks etc which involve a lot of theoretical work.

It’s been debunked by far more economists than have supported it. Frankly, you can get that from Wikipedia!

And it’s not a real world description when it patently can’t be true anywhere that has the Euro, anywhere like Bosnia that effectively uses two currencies (also true for Argentina by your own admission).

And, yes, the point of it is, among other things, to allow money to be “harmlessly”printed in bulk, which is inflationary

 

[dazzer6666]

And there are dark clouds coming in the property market. In BTL not being able to offset mortgage interest was OK with 2% rate but with 6% rates the business model will be on its arse, especially for JCL's

Prices are going to fall and the blame will be on the government, Labour will milk it

Yep. Many BTL landlords punted on interest rates remaining very low, taking on the invest risk that they would rise and make their investments less lucrative. No different to any other type of investment, except for goodness knows how long they’ve only seen upside so have ignored/forgotten the potential downside. They won’t be able to put rents up to compensate, so expecting a flood of properties on the market as they fall behind with payments, and then prices will fall.

 

[nicko31]

Looks like the mini budget is being thrown out other than-

- relaxation of stamp duty
- changes to nics
- energy guarantee to be rejigged so that it is means tested in year 2?

Since she has been banging on about the energy price guarantee as being a central element of her budget and leadership campaign surely she will have to stand down? It seems that it was too costly and was leaving a bigger deficit in the budget than previously estimated.

The energy cap is massively costly and needs to be offered to only those that need the help, plus they need to proper windfall tax on the fossil fuel companies or a commitment all excess profit will be invested back into renewables.

 

[nicko31]

Yep. Many BTL landlords punted on interest rates remaining very low, taking on the invest risk that they would rise and make their investments less lucrative. No different to any other type of investment, except for goodness knows how long they’ve only seen upside so have ignored/forgotten the potential downside. They won’t be able to put rents up to compensate, so expecting a flood of properties on the market as they fall behind with payments, and then prices will fall.

Agreed, there is no way landlords can wack prices up. There is will be distressed sales....

 

[beorhthelm]

I`ll keep it brief - MMT has not been discredited - please give evidence of this. MMT is a school of economic thought. All of economics is a pseudoscience in that sense as economic is a social science unlike chemistry or physics. MMT does not propose the unlimited printing of addtional money - where did you get that idea from? Some elements of MMT are undisputable observable facts or can be deduced from simple logic. For example, banks and the central government do create money out of thin air by keystrokes on a computer, and tax does not fund government spending in the UK as citizens must have money in their pockets first before they can pay tax, and the money of course is produced by the government or their agents, the banks. Also, yes I agree maybe MMT should have been called something else like modern monetary description but in addtion to the purely descriptive stuff, Professor Bill Mitchell and others have done a lot of work on issues like the need for a job guarantee and unemployment buffer stocks etc which involve a lot of theoretical work.

in bold, you make this statement as if it is undeniable fact, and its the basis of MMT. some problems.
near half the population pay no direct tax, under this model they have no need for money. business may make no profit and therefore no tax, so have no need for money. clearly this is nonsense, so doesnt money have primary purpose as means of exchange?
accepting that banks create money, through debts, this is a feature of all fiat currencies, why does MMT only apply to select sovereign monetary systems and not others, or monetary unions?
a bonus question: current fiat monetary systems predate computers (since coming off gold standard), how did they create money?