Chancellor delivers plan for stability, growth and public services

[Mr K]

Protecting those that don't work by penalising those that do, is a recipe for disaster in our ageing society.

Doesn't matter how well off you are, if those that deliver vital public services , produce food , deliver healthcare, decide it's not worth their while any longer then we're all stuffed.

[Chrysalis]

Originally Posted by Mr K

Protecting those that don't work by penalising those that do, is a recipe for disaster in our ageing society.

Doesn't matter how well off you are, if those that deliver vital public services , produce food , deliver healthcare, decide it's not worth their while any longer then we're all stuffed.

I was starting to think as a society we had moved on from this view, and thought we had progress seeing a tory budget prioritising the poorest.

But you not alone, I know a fair few people who agree with you, I tried to explain its not a workers against not workers thing as many of the targeted do actually work. Its a having to target the poorest who are in most need, but we have been groomed since the Thatcher years to be selfish and to treat budgets as in a whats in it for me thing, and this mentality we have has contributed to the state the country is in today as we have been prioritising individuals over society.

When I used to claim sickness benefits, I know the years I was on it, there was no inflationary increases, in fact it was frozen. I also remember a period I was on JSA for about 2 months, I was so poor my sister had to buy my food shopping for me. My experience serves to remind me there is people in a worse situation, those people targeted by the measures. There will always be claims there is a life of luxury, everyone has max sky tv etc. But I only know the reality of my own experience and the people I have met of which none lead a life thats been painted.

I am not sure what people were expecting from this budget, Labour has not managed to get back in to power, on the basis that people think they were a party that spent too much, that built up the countries debt, and we couldnt afford their plans. But yet on this budget people were expecting a nationwide give away whilst there was a 55 billion hole to be plugged, Truss tried to give the least needy what they wanted and it needed the BoE to intervene to prevent financial carnage.

I think we are at the start of a social shift which the Tories have recognised hence this budget, but of course we still have many who not part of that shift, wondering why this budget is so "unfair" and "rewarding lazyness".

I could see the unrest starting as far back as spring, when the CoL payments were first announced loads popped out the wood work "where is my share", "me too" etc. I think it is fair to say the country is split on this, as it is on Brexit.

I do think we have too many taxes, I think we could have scrapped HS2 to ease the tax burden, I think council taxes should be abolished and replaced with central funding, I also think there needs to be more pressure to get wages up closer to inflation, a family member works for one of the energy companies making windfall profits (the actual wealthy part of the company not the supplier part) and is getting a 2% pay rise which is a complete joke, tried to tell her the poor arent to blame for that, but she has made her mind up. There is a union where she works, but it sounds like they not doing anything about it.

I also think education and the NHS were probably right to be protected the most, however we clearly need more spending on housing and communities. Plus a plan for our economy, I think my local area most of the local GDP is from private landlords these days and takeaways. Actual traditional sources of GDP in this country are on the decline. We have a big hospitality industry which is about to get wrecked as thats reliant on people having disposable cash. We heading for very grim times I think, and the current prediction of things getting better as early as 2024 seems very optimistic to me.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

I am not sure what people were expecting from this budget, Labour has not managed to get back in to power, on the basis that people think they were a party that spent too much, that built up the countries debt, and we couldnt afford their plans. But yet on this budget people were expecting a nationwide give away whilst there was a 55 billion hole to be plugged, Truss tried to give the least needy what they wanted and it needed the BoE to intervene to prevent financial carnage.

You do realise the tories are responsible for 70% of the debt accrued by this country since 1945 don't you? Not sure this 55 billion hole is the catastrophe it's been painted either and isn't just an excuse for another round of austerity

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

You do realise the tories are responsible for 70% of the debt accrued by this country since 1945 don't you?

Link ? Source ?

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Not sure this 55 billion hole is the catastrophe it's been painted either and isn't just an excuse for another round of austerity

You dont think being short of £55 billion is an issue ?
Granted its small compared to our overall debt (almost 2.5 trillion) but its not going to make it any better.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Paul

Link ? Source ?

House of commons library iirc

You dont think being short of £55 billion is an issue ?
Granted its small compared to our overall debt (almost 2.5 trillion) but its not going to make it any better.

If it isn't an issue for America, Germany or Japan, whose borrowing is far greater as a proportion of gdp why is it so vital for us to get to grips with it right now instead of waiting for the other disasters to settle down a bit

I dont think "its ok for us to be in debt because someone is in even bigger debt" is a great excuse or plan.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Paul

I dont think "its ok for us to be in debt because someone is in even bigger debt" is a great excuse or plan.

Almost every country will almost always be in debt - the idea being that the money spent now innovating (e.g. in infrastructure) will reap rewards in economic growth therefore in turn making it easier and cheaper to pay off.

Similar to taking out a 25 year mortgage now. In year 24, after wage rises and career progression the burden of payments (should!) be much lower. You would also hope the house you have now would enjoy a rise in value.

However the problem is when you get into debt, and a deficit, without investing in infrastructure to promote growth. If you get the balance right it should work well. I accept it's theoretical.

[Pierre]

Here is a different take on the mini-budget and how it may not have totally Trusses or Kwartangs fault the markets were spooked. Instead of coming to the rescue the BoE was the protagonist. Trussenomics could have been given a go!

I don’t know but it’s always best to absorb all information.

https://thecritic.co.uk/issues/decem...he-government/

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Pierre

Here is a different take on the mini-budget and how it may not have totally Trusses or Kwartangs fault the markets were spooked. Instead of coming to the rescue the BoE was the protagonist. Trussenomics could have been given a go!

I don’t know but it’s always best to absorb all information.

https://thecritic.co.uk/issues/decem...he-government/

While I don’t agree with much of the take, I do agree the BoE were intervening in a manner to maintain economic orthodoxy. It was undoubtedly backing that the Government would back down before it did.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by jfman

While I don’t agree with much of the take, I do agree the BoE were intervening in a manner to maintain economic orthodoxy. It was undoubtedly backing that the Government would back down before it did.

I just think there could have been another way, we could have had another outcome other than the shit sandwich we have just been served by Jeremy Chunt (silent H).

Truss wasn’t the answer, but neither did anyone ask for Sunak, at least Truss was put in place by some kind of democratic process (albeit by a minority of the population). Sunak was appointed, by those who know best.

The problem for me is, in 96 (or 95 I can’t remember) Labour was a proper alternative. I believed they were credible.

But even with the complete and utter firesale that is the Tory party, who I dislike. I would rather hold my nose and vote for those knobheads than Labour.

Labour offer nothing

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Pierre

I just think there could have been another way, we could have had another outcome other than the shit sandwich we have just been served by Jeremy Chunt (silent H).

Truss wasn’t the answer, but neither did anyone ask for Sunak, at least Truss was put in place by some kind of democratic process (albeit by a minority of the population). Sunak was appointed, by those who know best.

The problem for me is, in 96 (or 95 I can’t remember) Labour was a proper alternative. I believed they were credible.

But even with the complete and utter firesale that is the Tory party, who I dislike. I would rather hold my nose and vote for those knobheads than Labour.

Labour offer nothing

The UK is in decline regardless of the colour of the tie. If you go to far left you will have the London elites rail on you as a racist. Go to far right and the international consensus will rail against you in the marketplace.

Sadly despite much emphasis on sovereignty in the last decade of British politics it appears we aren't very sovereign at all.

[Chrysalis]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

You do realise the tories are responsible for 70% of the debt accrued by this country since 1945 don't you? Not sure this 55 billion hole is the catastrophe it's been painted either and isn't just an excuse for another round of austerity

It wouldnt be normally such a big issue, but the problem is the previous short lived PM drawn attention to the countries finances by not attempting to explain how her tax cuts were funded and withholding important economic data, this led to the currency crashing and the BoE having to intervene to prevent a financial meltdown. Even the IMF started commenting on the situation.

As to historical debt, I have the mindset I dont hold entities for things that happened decades ago. Both parties have changed radically over the years from their historical positions and will continue to do so. Because of this I tend not to be loyal to one given party over my lifetime.

Also comparing 2010 to now, if you look at spending graphs there is a clear difference. Back in 2010 housing and community funding got absolutely decimated as did the welfare system, it was a clear target and there was also funding cuts in real terms for governmental departments, this time round welfare has actually been protected and in real cash terms things are either going up below inflation or stagnant, but no 2010 level cuts. It is austerity but its nothing like what we seen in 2010.

---------- Post added at 00:44 ---------- Previous post was at 00:27 ----------

Originally Posted by Pierre

Here is a different take on the mini-budget and how it may not have totally Trusses or Kwartangs fault the markets were spooked. Instead of coming to the rescue the BoE was the protagonist. Trussenomics could have been given a go!

I don’t know but it’s always best to absorb all information.

https://thecritic.co.uk/issues/decem...he-government/

It is an interesting take, the issues I have with it is I think the current inflation has not been caused by an over supply of money, most of the inflation is on essentials which will get brought regardless of the money supply, as proven by the EPG, the 10% rise for the poor and CoL payments, the government will buy essentials for people when they can no longer afford to do so. I would say the primary driver of current inflation is a combination of a shift in the energy market and shareholder driven.

The government has recognised this and has announced they are adopting a policy of isolating us from the energy market for our energy, the plan is to be self dependent on our energy requirements which would then shield us at least to a degree from a now very volatile market.

The inflation rises has led to (in my opinion) opportunistic price increases on various goods, which is now impacting things like food and other products, further increasing inflation. Time will tell if demand for goods brought from supermarkets go down as people get poorer, but my expectation is there will not be a significant drop.

One area where I think spending will go down is hospitality, that sector is going to get absolutely decimated, but will we see deflation there? unlikely as many hospitality business owners have revealed they simply cannot afford to do so, if anything further price increases are on the way, instead will just be a lot of liquidated businesses.

The areas that will be first to see change is luxury goods, Phones, computer components in particular are clearly currently overpriced, previously tolerated by the consumers, but the problem here is that these arent really the current problem, we not in this crisis because people cannot afford to buy a TV.

The BoE have a remit thats controlled by the government, and one obvious problem during Truss's reign is she was working against the BoE. Instead of with it. It has a remit to control inflation, and it has only limited tools to do so, the idea behind raising rates been to reduce the money supply which in turn would be expected to curb consumer spending and of course that slows down growth, yet the PM and the chancellor for the time adopted an aggressive growth strategy totally at odds of what the BoE was trying to do.

There is also an argument that any spending needs to be well targeted, you give a poor person £1000 its pretty much a given thats going straight back into the local economy, they have no choice but to spend it for their day to day living. Give it to a top wage earner, and there is a fair chance it just sits in a bank account for a decade or more which does far less for the economy.

So those are my issues with the view point offered in that article.

[Ramrod]

The Tories seem to be hell bent on losing the next election.

[Ms NTL]

Originally Posted by Mr K

Protecting those that don't work by penalising those that do, is a recipe for disaster in our ageing society.

Doesn't matter how well off you are, if those that deliver vital public services , produce food , deliver healthcare, decide it's not worth their while any longer then we're all stuffed.

Spot on. How many NHS consultants "retired" early? Why the Judges got a "deal" but not the NHS consultants?

Originally Posted by Ramrod

The Tories seem to be hell bent on losing the next election.

I think they will succeed in that plan, we will be lumped with Labour.