| Liz Truss Budget 16:10 - Sep 19 with 3355 views | builthjack |
Cost the country £30 BILLION POUNDS.
THATS 30,000 million pounds for.those that don't know what a billion is.
|  |
| Swansea Indepenent Poster Of The Year 2021. Dr P / Mart66 / Roathie / Parlay / E20/ Duffle was 2nd, but he is deluded and thinks in his little twisted brain that he won. Poor sod. We let him win this year, as he has cried for a whole year. His 14 usernames, bless his cotton socks.
|
| |  |
| Liz Truss Budget on 13:01 - Sep 30 with 789 views | Badgeman |
| Liz Truss Budget on 12:21 - Sep 30 by Joesus_Of_Narbereth |
It was certainly a choice for the Irish farmers and business owners who grew and sold all that food as to who they sold it to and at what price. Their fellow countrymen dying all around them but they wanted more money for themselves. Greed ruled supreme then as it does now. A similar situation happened a century later in bengal as local landowners sat on huge stockpiles of food and grain as the prices shot up whilst everyone starved around them.
Pure greed and general apathy to the plight of supposedly worthless peasants from both sides of the Irish Sea. |
The penal laws kept Irish catholics disenfranchised and repressed for centuries prior to the famine. The Government could've intervened, repealed the corn laws earlier, stopped the rampant profiteering from British and Anglo-Irish ruling classes, and shut the ports as had happened in the past.
But as I said, the famine was a political choice. |  |
| |
| Liz Truss Budget on 13:29 - Sep 30 with 774 views | onehunglow |
| Liz Truss Budget on 13:01 - Sep 30 by Badgeman |
The penal laws kept Irish catholics disenfranchised and repressed for centuries prior to the famine. The Government could've intervened, repealed the corn laws earlier, stopped the rampant profiteering from British and Anglo-Irish ruling classes, and shut the ports as had happened in the past.
But as I said, the famine was a political choice. |
Absolutely right.
Quite why we kept that country for so long beats me . |  |
| |
| Liz Truss Budget on 22:03 - Oct 27 with 627 views | builthjack |
£30 billion would go a long way | |
| Swansea Indepenent Poster Of The Year 2021. Dr P / Mart66 / Roathie / Parlay / E20/ Duffle was 2nd, but he is deluded and thinks in his little twisted brain that he won. Poor sod. We let him win this year, as he has cried for a whole year. His 14 usernames, bless his cotton socks.
|
| |
| Liz Truss Budget on 13:27 - Oct 28 with 570 views | SullutaCreturned |
| Liz Truss Budget on 22:41 - Sep 21 by Kilkennyjack |
Blair stepped down as Labour leader in ….. June 2007.
We are now talking about 2023 ffs. |
So we can't talk about less than 20 years back? I'll remember that the next time you harp on about something from 600 years ago.
The Truss budget didn't actually cost 30 billion, I don't think,
The £30 billion figure came from an (old) analysis by the Resolution Foundation (RF).
Around £20 billion of the £30 billion was simply a (high) estimate of the cost to the Treasury of those tax cuts in the mini-budget that have survived. This is mainly accounted for by the reversal of the increases in National Insurance (NI) contributions, and partly by the reductions in Stamp Duty.
Ironically, these measures were widely welcomed at the time, in part because they made a deep recession less likely. It is certainly odd to characterise £20 billion of tax cuts as a cost to taxpayers! The remaining £10 billion was an (old) RF estimate of the annual increase in the government’s cost of borrowing that might be attributed to the fallout from the Truss premiership. This is just speculation. Indeed, most market commentators would agree with me that any significant risk premia in UK assets have long since evaporated.
Of course, some will argue that even if the £74/65/30 billion figures are wrong, the mini-Budget ‘wrecked the economy’ (it didn’t) and that we are still paying the price now (we aren’t).
One example of this dubious narrative is the many tweets which blame the mini-Budget for the sustained increase in mortgage interest rates. But mortgage rates (and mortgage spreads) have also surged in many other countries, notably the US.
Another is the attempt to pin the IMF’s recent downgrade of the UK’s growth forecast for 2023 on ‘the country’s disastrous autumn of Trussonomics, which came too late for the IMF’s October forecasts’. This interpretation makes little sense.
In its October World Economic Outlook, the IMF itself noted that the fiscal expansion in the mini-Budget was ‘expected to lift growth somewhat above the forecast in the near term’, albeit at the cost of complicating the fight against inflation.
That was written by an economist, it's not my words but it makes sense. In which case the cost to the UK was around 10 billion which is still a staggeringly large sum of money. | | | |
| Liz Truss Budget on 13:27 - Oct 28 with 568 views | felixstowe_jack |
Latest figures show there are over 120, 000 empty houses in Wales. Wonder why the Welsh government has allowed this to happen.
67,000 people in Wales on housing association waiting lists. Now there is a real problem the Welsh government could solve. | |
| |
| Liz Truss Budget on 13:42 - Oct 28 with 556 views | SullutaCreturned |
| Liz Truss Budget on 13:27 - Oct 28 by felixstowe_jack |
Latest figures show there are over 120, 000 empty houses in Wales. Wonder why the Welsh government has allowed this to happen.
67,000 people in Wales on housing association waiting lists. Now there is a real problem the Welsh government could solve. |
Apparently there are nearly 290000 empty hoses across the UK. If your numbers are right then Wales is worse than elsewhere in the Uk, I wonder why?
it must be those darned second home owners.
Mind you, on my travels with work I do see several derelict houses, I wonder how many houses truly are empty across Wales, never in use and COULD be developed and used? Anyone know? | | | |
| Liz Truss Budget on 13:48 - Oct 28 with 546 views | Whiterockin |
| Liz Truss Budget on 13:42 - Oct 28 by SullutaCreturned |
Apparently there are nearly 290000 empty hoses across the UK. If your numbers are right then Wales is worse than elsewhere in the Uk, I wonder why?
it must be those darned second home owners.
Mind you, on my travels with work I do see several derelict houses, I wonder how many houses truly are empty across Wales, never in use and COULD be developed and used? Anyone know? |
What would you class as an empty house. I would imagine many would be up for sale in a slow market. |  |
| |
| Liz Truss Budget on 15:53 - Oct 28 with 506 views | SullutaCreturned |
| Liz Truss Budget on 13:48 - Oct 28 by Whiterockin |
What would you class as an empty house. I would imagine many would be up for sale in a slow market. |
That's the thing, a lot of these so called empty houses could be those second homes. There is a house on our street that may have been classed as empty because it's owner went into a care home and it was empty until it was sold this week, that's 6 months. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Liz Truss Budget on 16:06 - Oct 28 with 489 views | Whiterockin |
| Liz Truss Budget on 15:53 - Oct 28 by SullutaCreturned |
That's the thing, a lot of these so called empty houses could be those second homes. There is a house on our street that may have been classed as empty because it's owner went into a care home and it was empty until it was sold this week, that's 6 months. |
My extended family have 3 for sale from various branches, all are deceased and there is no rush to sell. There are also 2 close to where I live in a similar position. | |
| |
| Liz Truss Budget on 16:55 - Oct 28 with 465 views | majorraglan |
| Liz Truss Budget on 13:27 - Oct 28 by felixstowe_jack |
Latest figures show there are over 120, 000 empty houses in Wales. Wonder why the Welsh government has allowed this to happen.
67,000 people in Wales on housing association waiting lists. Now there is a real problem the Welsh government could solve. |
Have you taken this from the BBC article which is quoting census data gathered during the pandemic in 2021? The census data refers to a 1 day snap shot in time. The ONS actually warned that the number which are truly vacant is much lower.
The article actually says up to 120,000 may be empty, however that’s well out of kilter with numerous of previous figures which have the number of vacant properties around 25,000 dwellings. Figures released by several organisations since the census took place have the empty houses figure back to around 25,000 units, if that figure is correct it’s a vacancy rate of about 1.7%.
According to parliamentary figures, England has around 700,000 empty houses out of a stock of around 25m houses, a vacancy rate of about 2.5%.
The figure of 120,000 is almost 10% of the total housing stock in Wales and I can’t honestly see that 1 in 10 houses in Wales is vacant, it just doesn’t make sense.
In terms of taking action, there are some grants etc are available to bring houses back in to use, but they come with conditions. It’s more than they have in England and the Welsh and Scottish initiatives have been praised in Westminster and questions have been asked why Westminster doesn’t have similar schemes. | | | |
| Liz Truss Budget on 16:56 - Oct 28 with 459 views | majorraglan |
| Liz Truss Budget on 13:42 - Oct 28 by SullutaCreturned |
Apparently there are nearly 290000 empty hoses across the UK. If your numbers are right then Wales is worse than elsewhere in the Uk, I wonder why?
it must be those darned second home owners.
Mind you, on my travels with work I do see several derelict houses, I wonder how many houses truly are empty across Wales, never in use and COULD be developed and used? Anyone know? |
I don’t think it is right, I suspect the numbers are wrong. There is no way 1 in 10/11 houses is vacant. | | | |
| Liz Truss Budget on 17:34 - Oct 28 with 434 views | majorraglan |
| Liz Truss Budget on 13:27 - Oct 28 by SullutaCreturned |
So we can't talk about less than 20 years back? I'll remember that the next time you harp on about something from 600 years ago.
The Truss budget didn't actually cost 30 billion, I don't think,
The £30 billion figure came from an (old) analysis by the Resolution Foundation (RF).
Around £20 billion of the £30 billion was simply a (high) estimate of the cost to the Treasury of those tax cuts in the mini-budget that have survived. This is mainly accounted for by the reversal of the increases in National Insurance (NI) contributions, and partly by the reductions in Stamp Duty.
Ironically, these measures were widely welcomed at the time, in part because they made a deep recession less likely. It is certainly odd to characterise £20 billion of tax cuts as a cost to taxpayers! The remaining £10 billion was an (old) RF estimate of the annual increase in the government’s cost of borrowing that might be attributed to the fallout from the Truss premiership. This is just speculation. Indeed, most market commentators would agree with me that any significant risk premia in UK assets have long since evaporated.
Of course, some will argue that even if the £74/65/30 billion figures are wrong, the mini-Budget ‘wrecked the economy’ (it didn’t) and that we are still paying the price now (we aren’t).
One example of this dubious narrative is the many tweets which blame the mini-Budget for the sustained increase in mortgage interest rates. But mortgage rates (and mortgage spreads) have also surged in many other countries, notably the US.
Another is the attempt to pin the IMF’s recent downgrade of the UK’s growth forecast for 2023 on ‘the country’s disastrous autumn of Trussonomics, which came too late for the IMF’s October forecasts’. This interpretation makes little sense.
In its October World Economic Outlook, the IMF itself noted that the fiscal expansion in the mini-Budget was ‘expected to lift growth somewhat above the forecast in the near term’, albeit at the cost of complicating the fight against inflation.
That was written by an economist, it's not my words but it makes sense. In which case the cost to the UK was around 10 billion which is still a staggeringly large sum of money. |
The Truss budget didn’t end up costing us £30bn, but it has cost us money. Truss’s explanation and rationale for her budget - trickle down economics etc has been roundly savaged and condemned as voodoo economics by most economists and the markets who ramped up the interest rates on bonds etc.
There’s no doubt interest rates would have gone up, but ours have gone up higher than most countries and there’s a so called “moron premium” - a little bit of an extra interest rate increase because of Truss. That is being felt by lots of people who’ve had the misfortune to renew their mortgage etc over the last 12 months or will have to renew their mortgage.
Truss and Kwarteng deliberately tried to sideline the OBR and this caused chaos in the markets, if the hit was £10bn that was around £5bn more than Brown’s gold sale hit.
There are some who claim Brown’s sale of the gold actually turned a profit for the U.K. by the time the benefits on the realisation of the £4bn sale were calculated, but I’m not convinced. | | | |
| Liz Truss Budget on 18:38 - Oct 28 with 415 views | SullutaCreturned |
| Liz Truss Budget on 17:34 - Oct 28 by majorraglan |
The Truss budget didn’t end up costing us £30bn, but it has cost us money. Truss’s explanation and rationale for her budget - trickle down economics etc has been roundly savaged and condemned as voodoo economics by most economists and the markets who ramped up the interest rates on bonds etc.
There’s no doubt interest rates would have gone up, but ours have gone up higher than most countries and there’s a so called “moron premium” - a little bit of an extra interest rate increase because of Truss. That is being felt by lots of people who’ve had the misfortune to renew their mortgage etc over the last 12 months or will have to renew their mortgage.
Truss and Kwarteng deliberately tried to sideline the OBR and this caused chaos in the markets, if the hit was £10bn that was around £5bn more than Brown’s gold sale hit.
There are some who claim Brown’s sale of the gold actually turned a profit for the U.K. by the time the benefits on the realisation of the £4bn sale were calculated, but I’m not convinced. |
trickle down economics has been a tory lie for a long time, there is no such benefit. Thng is, Welsh labour seem to be "labouring" under the same delusion, that if the capital city is booming it will trickle down to the rest of Wales.
10 billion is still a blooming heck of a lot of money, it was inflated to 30 billion to be a bigger hit on the tories, it's not like anyone needs to lie to attack the tory party, there are plenty of real facts to hit them with.
Our interest rates were higher, maybe because our chancellor said he was happy for there to be a recession if it brought inflation down, that's jeremy cHunt for you.
Truss and Kwarteng are yet more passengers of that ship of fools, them and anybody who voted tory or still supports them. They are killing the UK.
We are still lucky, on a personal level, our mortgage is still fixed for another 3 years, hopefully we'll be thru this nonsense by then. At the very least we should have a Labour government so lets see what they come up with. | | | |
| Liz Truss Budget on 22:25 - Oct 28 with 376 views | majorraglan |
| Liz Truss Budget on 18:38 - Oct 28 by SullutaCreturned |
trickle down economics has been a tory lie for a long time, there is no such benefit. Thng is, Welsh labour seem to be "labouring" under the same delusion, that if the capital city is booming it will trickle down to the rest of Wales.
10 billion is still a blooming heck of a lot of money, it was inflated to 30 billion to be a bigger hit on the tories, it's not like anyone needs to lie to attack the tory party, there are plenty of real facts to hit them with.
Our interest rates were higher, maybe because our chancellor said he was happy for there to be a recession if it brought inflation down, that's jeremy cHunt for you.
Truss and Kwarteng are yet more passengers of that ship of fools, them and anybody who voted tory or still supports them. They are killing the UK.
We are still lucky, on a personal level, our mortgage is still fixed for another 3 years, hopefully we'll be thru this nonsense by then. At the very least we should have a Labour government so lets see what they come up with. |
My interest only mortgage went up from £145 per month to £680 per month when the deal came to an end - mental. | | | |
| Liz Truss Budget on 22:31 - Oct 28 with 370 views | Dr_Winston |
There is an argument to be made that Interest Rates have been artificially low for far too long and as a result of that house prices have risen unsustainably.
Certainly if you're looking at historical IR then the last decade or so are definitely an outlier. If people are strugging with mortgage prices then that's partly their own fault for borrowing more than they can afford to repay and partly the Goverment's fault for letting them. |  |
| Pain or damage don't end the world. Or despair, or f*cking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man... and give some back. |
| |
| Liz Truss Budget on 22:58 - Oct 28 with 355 views | builthjack |
| Liz Truss Budget on 22:25 - Oct 28 by majorraglan |
My interest only mortgage went up from £145 per month to £680 per month when the deal came to an end - mental. |
Youngsters who stand on their own two feet have no chance. | |
| Swansea Indepenent Poster Of The Year 2021. Dr P / Mart66 / Roathie / Parlay / E20/ Duffle was 2nd, but he is deluded and thinks in his little twisted brain that he won. Poor sod. We let him win this year, as he has cried for a whole year. His 14 usernames, bless his cotton socks.
|
| |
| Liz Truss Budget on 23:14 - Oct 28 with 348 views | onehunglow |
| Liz Truss Budget on 17:00 - Sep 21 by JACKMANANDBOY |
We were all encouraged to matriculate at school. |
Many did that in the chapel vestry | |
| |
| Liz Truss Budget on 01:06 - Oct 29 with 334 views | Joesus_Of_Narbereth |
If I could play devils advocate here for a moment the policy of lowering of income and corporation tax seems quite appealing. More disposable income in the pockets of millions who are getting squeezed until the pips squeak as it is and more profit for businesses. Freeze on energy prices…check, that sounds good too. In other words these are things that a lot of people would vote for.
So what exactly was the driving force behind Truss’s downfall?
It would be the obvious and fair solution to point out that these tax cuts were apparently unfunded, but then this isn’t a new thing. Many PM’s and chancellors have sunk billions if not trillions into hare brained schemes with no apparent way to pay for it. The fact the country was already massively in debt decades before Truss came on the scene sort of exemplifies this.
The cynic in me notes that the movers and shakers, the power brokers didn’t want her in the first place. The Tory MP’s wanted Sunak. Truss came second. Sunak is also the markets man, he’s the IMF man. He’s the Davos man. It felt at the time and even more so now with hindsight that there was a real concerted effort to get their man in. He’s been bloody useless himself. A disaster. He’s miles behind in the polls and everyone thinks he’s a complete tool yet there seems to be little dissent for him. There are very few Tory MP’s trying to remove him. He’s not being held to the same standard as Truss. He committed the same or similar “partygate” offences that Boris got sacked for but it’s never brought up or even mentioned.
Personally I think it’s all very strange.
Have we reached a point now that all government decisions have to be run by and vetted by the IMF and the markets first? I don’t generally go in for conspiracy theories and you can call me David Icke if you want but you have to wonder who is really running the show? Who are our governments actually serving? Who is really in charge? |  |
| |
| Liz Truss Budget on 06:53 - Oct 29 with 311 views | majorraglan |
| Liz Truss Budget on 01:06 - Oct 29 by Joesus_Of_Narbereth |
If I could play devils advocate here for a moment the policy of lowering of income and corporation tax seems quite appealing. More disposable income in the pockets of millions who are getting squeezed until the pips squeak as it is and more profit for businesses. Freeze on energy prices…check, that sounds good too. In other words these are things that a lot of people would vote for.
So what exactly was the driving force behind Truss’s downfall?
It would be the obvious and fair solution to point out that these tax cuts were apparently unfunded, but then this isn’t a new thing. Many PM’s and chancellors have sunk billions if not trillions into hare brained schemes with no apparent way to pay for it. The fact the country was already massively in debt decades before Truss came on the scene sort of exemplifies this.
The cynic in me notes that the movers and shakers, the power brokers didn’t want her in the first place. The Tory MP’s wanted Sunak. Truss came second. Sunak is also the markets man, he’s the IMF man. He’s the Davos man. It felt at the time and even more so now with hindsight that there was a real concerted effort to get their man in. He’s been bloody useless himself. A disaster. He’s miles behind in the polls and everyone thinks he’s a complete tool yet there seems to be little dissent for him. There are very few Tory MP’s trying to remove him. He’s not being held to the same standard as Truss. He committed the same or similar “partygate” offences that Boris got sacked for but it’s never brought up or even mentioned.
Personally I think it’s all very strange.
Have we reached a point now that all government decisions have to be run by and vetted by the IMF and the markets first? I don’t generally go in for conspiracy theories and you can call me David Icke if you want but you have to wonder who is really running the show? Who are our governments actually serving? Who is really in charge? |
Quite simply, she messed it all up.
She wanted to borrow huge amounts for unfunded tax cuts at a time when the country’s debt levels were higher than they’d ever been. The people she wanted to borrow the cash from - the markets were concerned about the debt level, the ability to repay, the fact she ignored orthodoxy, sacked experienced well regarded people and ignored/marginalised the OBR was enough. As soon as her budget was announced the markets went in to melt down and our credit rating began sliding which meant the cost of borrowing began climbing and there was a huge run on pension company assets which forced the Bank of England in to spending tens of billions to prevent the companies from going under which would have annihilated people’s pensions.
I can’t think of any chancellor or PM who’ve sunk trillions in to hare brained schemes.
In terms of Sunak, maybe the Conservative MP’s could see Truss’s limitations because they saw her say in day out whereas we don’t, we get the spin version from the media. In terms of the markets, there is no way a politician can work against the markets, if they are lending us billions and billions they want economic stability and its madness to believe otherwise -Black Wednesday showed us that. You mention Boris’s fine, he was only fined once but there is evidence he was at numerous other parties but seemingly he’s got away with it. The issue that ended things for Boris wass as when he lied about knowing about the MP who was ousted for groping.
There’s plenty of articles out there about Truss’s downfall. | | | |
| Liz Truss Budget on 07:22 - Oct 29 with 304 views | builthjack |
| Liz Truss Budget on 01:06 - Oct 29 by Joesus_Of_Narbereth |
If I could play devils advocate here for a moment the policy of lowering of income and corporation tax seems quite appealing. More disposable income in the pockets of millions who are getting squeezed until the pips squeak as it is and more profit for businesses. Freeze on energy prices…check, that sounds good too. In other words these are things that a lot of people would vote for.
So what exactly was the driving force behind Truss’s downfall?
It would be the obvious and fair solution to point out that these tax cuts were apparently unfunded, but then this isn’t a new thing. Many PM’s and chancellors have sunk billions if not trillions into hare brained schemes with no apparent way to pay for it. The fact the country was already massively in debt decades before Truss came on the scene sort of exemplifies this.
The cynic in me notes that the movers and shakers, the power brokers didn’t want her in the first place. The Tory MP’s wanted Sunak. Truss came second. Sunak is also the markets man, he’s the IMF man. He’s the Davos man. It felt at the time and even more so now with hindsight that there was a real concerted effort to get their man in. He’s been bloody useless himself. A disaster. He’s miles behind in the polls and everyone thinks he’s a complete tool yet there seems to be little dissent for him. There are very few Tory MP’s trying to remove him. He’s not being held to the same standard as Truss. He committed the same or similar “partygate” offences that Boris got sacked for but it’s never brought up or even mentioned.
Personally I think it’s all very strange.
Have we reached a point now that all government decisions have to be run by and vetted by the IMF and the markets first? I don’t generally go in for conspiracy theories and you can call me David Icke if you want but you have to wonder who is really running the show? Who are our governments actually serving? Who is really in charge? |
Sunak is a chancer. He thinks with a bit of smooth talking he can blag his way through.
It’s playing into Starmers hands. | |
| Swansea Indepenent Poster Of The Year 2021. Dr P / Mart66 / Roathie / Parlay / E20/ Duffle was 2nd, but he is deluded and thinks in his little twisted brain that he won. Poor sod. We let him win this year, as he has cried for a whole year. His 14 usernames, bless his cotton socks.
|
| |
| Liz Truss Budget on 11:33 - Oct 29 with 258 views | SullutaCreturned |
| Liz Truss Budget on 01:06 - Oct 29 by Joesus_Of_Narbereth |
If I could play devils advocate here for a moment the policy of lowering of income and corporation tax seems quite appealing. More disposable income in the pockets of millions who are getting squeezed until the pips squeak as it is and more profit for businesses. Freeze on energy prices…check, that sounds good too. In other words these are things that a lot of people would vote for.
So what exactly was the driving force behind Truss’s downfall?
It would be the obvious and fair solution to point out that these tax cuts were apparently unfunded, but then this isn’t a new thing. Many PM’s and chancellors have sunk billions if not trillions into hare brained schemes with no apparent way to pay for it. The fact the country was already massively in debt decades before Truss came on the scene sort of exemplifies this.
The cynic in me notes that the movers and shakers, the power brokers didn’t want her in the first place. The Tory MP’s wanted Sunak. Truss came second. Sunak is also the markets man, he’s the IMF man. He’s the Davos man. It felt at the time and even more so now with hindsight that there was a real concerted effort to get their man in. He’s been bloody useless himself. A disaster. He’s miles behind in the polls and everyone thinks he’s a complete tool yet there seems to be little dissent for him. There are very few Tory MP’s trying to remove him. He’s not being held to the same standard as Truss. He committed the same or similar “partygate” offences that Boris got sacked for but it’s never brought up or even mentioned.
Personally I think it’s all very strange.
Have we reached a point now that all government decisions have to be run by and vetted by the IMF and the markets first? I don’t generally go in for conspiracy theories and you can call me David Icke if you want but you have to wonder who is really running the show? Who are our governments actually serving? Who is really in charge? |
I don't really do the whole tinfoil hat thing but the evidence is there that the worl is not run by individual governments, at least not as much as those governments would have us believe, the money people, the rich and powerful, they are exerting power behind the scenes.
When something happens the corporations nd the billionaires don't like they come straight in with threats to remove their business, they'll take their money esewhere and governments usually fall into line on the back of those threats.
The reality is that if Amazon stopped operating in the Uk tomorrow it leaves space for another business to step in, maybe a lot of smaller businesses so although it would be a hindrance for a short while, the gap would be filled.
That is why the rich and powerful often give sweeteners to politicans and offers of very well pad jobs when they leave politics, they are doing nothing less than buying government policies.
Surely that's not even a theory anymore, Sunak himself made changes that benefitte a sector his wife has financial interests in.
It's all corrupt and all across the world, whichever party, whether they are left, right or central, they are all being bought and/or bribed so the uber rich can keep on havingtheir way.
Take the "30 billion" truss cost the UK, only 10 billion approx of that was actual debt, all they did was add on the 20 billion of tax cuts she proposed, that'snot debt, it's a loss of income but by cutting taxes, what if she stimulated the economy and people spent more, creating more jobs and in the end the tax take actually grew?
We don't know, that could have happened but the markets and the rich and powerful didn't want thatso they reacted deliberately negatively and caused such a fuss that Truss had to go.
Lets assume that Starmer wins the next GE, what kind of Pm will he make? Chances are that he will be subject to the same things that got Truss, if he tries to change too much, if he really did make changes that benefitted the majority and saw the uber rich lose money, there will be consequences as the uber rich try to force him down a different road.
Now, maybe I am a tinfoil hatted looney toon too but we'll see. | | | |
| Liz Truss Budget on 12:12 - Oct 29 with 241 views | Joesus_Of_Narbereth |
| Liz Truss Budget on 11:33 - Oct 29 by SullutaCreturned |
I don't really do the whole tinfoil hat thing but the evidence is there that the worl is not run by individual governments, at least not as much as those governments would have us believe, the money people, the rich and powerful, they are exerting power behind the scenes.
When something happens the corporations nd the billionaires don't like they come straight in with threats to remove their business, they'll take their money esewhere and governments usually fall into line on the back of those threats.
The reality is that if Amazon stopped operating in the Uk tomorrow it leaves space for another business to step in, maybe a lot of smaller businesses so although it would be a hindrance for a short while, the gap would be filled.
That is why the rich and powerful often give sweeteners to politicans and offers of very well pad jobs when they leave politics, they are doing nothing less than buying government policies.
Surely that's not even a theory anymore, Sunak himself made changes that benefitte a sector his wife has financial interests in.
It's all corrupt and all across the world, whichever party, whether they are left, right or central, they are all being bought and/or bribed so the uber rich can keep on havingtheir way.
Take the "30 billion" truss cost the UK, only 10 billion approx of that was actual debt, all they did was add on the 20 billion of tax cuts she proposed, that'snot debt, it's a loss of income but by cutting taxes, what if she stimulated the economy and people spent more, creating more jobs and in the end the tax take actually grew?
We don't know, that could have happened but the markets and the rich and powerful didn't want thatso they reacted deliberately negatively and caused such a fuss that Truss had to go.
Lets assume that Starmer wins the next GE, what kind of Pm will he make? Chances are that he will be subject to the same things that got Truss, if he tries to change too much, if he really did make changes that benefitted the majority and saw the uber rich lose money, there will be consequences as the uber rich try to force him down a different road.
Now, maybe I am a tinfoil hatted looney toon too but we'll see. |
Even if you take the £30 billion out, the tax take last year is still a record high. It’s more than doubled in the last two decades. We are getting squeezed more than annyone since the days of king John and despite a long period of austerity we are still seemingly haemorrhaging money.
Source: https://www.statista.com/statistics/284298/total-united-kingdom-hmrc-tax-receipt
This is a huge mismanagement of public money by multiple governments, multiple PM’s, multiple chancellors over a huge period of time.
Where is it all gong? | |
| |
| Liz Truss Budget on 12:33 - Oct 29 with 234 views | Joesus_Of_Narbereth |
| Liz Truss Budget on 06:53 - Oct 29 by majorraglan |
Quite simply, she messed it all up.
She wanted to borrow huge amounts for unfunded tax cuts at a time when the country’s debt levels were higher than they’d ever been. The people she wanted to borrow the cash from - the markets were concerned about the debt level, the ability to repay, the fact she ignored orthodoxy, sacked experienced well regarded people and ignored/marginalised the OBR was enough. As soon as her budget was announced the markets went in to melt down and our credit rating began sliding which meant the cost of borrowing began climbing and there was a huge run on pension company assets which forced the Bank of England in to spending tens of billions to prevent the companies from going under which would have annihilated people’s pensions.
I can’t think of any chancellor or PM who’ve sunk trillions in to hare brained schemes.
In terms of Sunak, maybe the Conservative MP’s could see Truss’s limitations because they saw her say in day out whereas we don’t, we get the spin version from the media. In terms of the markets, there is no way a politician can work against the markets, if they are lending us billions and billions they want economic stability and its madness to believe otherwise -Black Wednesday showed us that. You mention Boris’s fine, he was only fined once but there is evidence he was at numerous other parties but seemingly he’s got away with it. The issue that ended things for Boris wass as when he lied about knowing about the MP who was ousted for groping.
There’s plenty of articles out there about Truss’s downfall. |
I’m not an economist by any stretch. In fact it’s probably my weakest area in terms of knowledge. That and golf. I’ll freely admit that.
But I do know politics and this was a unique reaction. Arguably there/was is far more instability during the brexit/covid period. That budget doesn’t really match up to either of those periods in terms of cost or lost money. The markets didn’t immediately click the “let’s f*ck Britain” button then. There was no pressure from them to oust May or Boris for the most part.
As I said I’m playing devils advocate a bit here. Not suggesting Truss was any good or any worse than the rest. It’s just a very strange situation. | |
| |
| Liz Truss Budget on 12:42 - Oct 29 with 229 views | Joesus_Of_Narbereth |
| Liz Truss Budget on 07:22 - Oct 29 by builthjack |
Sunak is a chancer. He thinks with a bit of smooth talking he can blag his way through.
It’s playing into Starmers hands. |
It’s not by chance or being a chancer he’s in this position. He’s there by design. He was groomed for this. And powerful people put him there. To go from a newly elected MP to chancellor to PM in six years is virtually unheard of.
But when you’re a billionaire you generally get what you want. | |
| |
| Liz Truss Budget on 13:56 - Oct 29 with 210 views | Gwyn737 |
| Liz Truss Budget on 12:12 - Oct 29 by Joesus_Of_Narbereth |
Even if you take the £30 billion out, the tax take last year is still a record high. It’s more than doubled in the last two decades. We are getting squeezed more than annyone since the days of king John and despite a long period of austerity we are still seemingly haemorrhaging money.
Source: https://www.statista.com/statistics/284298/total-united-kingdom-hmrc-tax-receipt
This is a huge mismanagement of public money by multiple governments, multiple PM’s, multiple chancellors over a huge period of time.
Where is it all gong? |
Doesn’t cover it all but there seems to be a massive issue with procurement, whether it’s the NHS, MoD, schools etc.
Large scheme projects seem to end up way, way, way over budget and don’t deliver what was promised. See HS2, the National Tutoring Programme and messing up filling aircraft carriers with planes for a start.
Trouble is paying managers and administrators is very politically unpopular. The NHS for example has far fewer than is necessary for an organisation of its size, but if any suggest spending health money on them, the public goes nuts. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
