The Lemon Fool

Does he understand what he does?

So he locks the rise in income tax allowance for several years - so we all become poorer over time. Such a progressive tax strategy.

Then he raises NI - but then ups the threshold so it doesn't hit the low paid - surely create a problem and then solve it and want a pat on the back!

But the bit that gets me is inflation running at >9% because he takes £49 out of every (£100) tank of fuel.
So if fuel is more expensive then deliveries are more expensive so food is .... see where this goes.
But he did take 5p off the duty - can he have another pat on the back. (5p less duty 25p more vat all looking good)

But at least the pensioners will vote for him now (oh sorry he isn't top of heap yet).

And then let's not mention the 'eat out to spread out' stunt. Or the £200 loan no a £400 grant (can you pat me again). Oh and the billions lost to - this is going to turn into a list
Dodgy company furlough
Dodgy PPE contracts
Burning the Dodgy PPE
Test and trace system

In charge of the purse strings doesn't seem to be his best job.

Chris

All you bitter guys will one day learn that it is totally unproductive and soul destroying to think like that. Accept the fact that the country has just been through the worst pandemic in living memory. Of course everyone accepts that things could have been done better with a lot less waste, leaving us with a very large amount of borrowings. Then we have what looks like the worst inflation for many years, mostly entirely outside of our control.

The government since it came to power has scarcely had a 'normal' week to understand what on earth is going on, and most of its ministers had no experience of government before all this hit.

Dod

chrissyr wrote:Does he understand what he does?

Probably mostly he does.

The public either don't understand, or choose not to believe, there are tough choices and we are collectively living beyond our means and to resolve that requires less spending or significant rises in tax revenues. That is only palatable to the majority if spending cuts don't affect them, or those tax rises are borne by others. Neither of which is realistically going to work.

Politically such honesty isn't going to work either. Economically not trying to resolve it just makes it worse in the longer run. Practically you get what we are seeing.

Often it is easier to take the option of being a Bitter Lemon than the more difficult stance of being a realist I would say.

And of course those who moan about what is being done have got no real solution except even more tax cuts. That only postpones the difficulties as those with longer memories can testify.

Dod

Dod101 wrote:The government since it came to power has scarcely had a 'normal' week to understand what on earth is going on, and most of its ministers had no experience of government before all this hit.

Dod

Yeah, it is so stretched for time that it's concentrating on the important stuff. Like privatising Channel 4. And bringing back pounds and ounces. (Whilst blaming Kier Starmer for everything.)

MrFoolish wrote:

Dod101 wrote:The government since it came to power has scarcely had a 'normal' week to understand what on earth is going on, and most of its ministers had no experience of government before all this hit.

Yeah, it is so stretched for time that it's concentrating on the important stuff. Like privatising Channel 4. And bringing back pounds and ounces. (Whilst blaming Kier Starmer for everything.)

Indeed, it's run by human beings who when faced with big insoluble issues sometimes fall back on little displacement activities so they can feel they're achieving something.

We, or some of us, used to worry about the debt and the deficit. They haven't gone away but as dealtn says, the measures to address them are off the table.
No big problem for well funded oldies like me, but sooner or later - more so sooner as rates rise - those two chickens are going to come home.
Sounds as if Bojo is going to do one sensible thing though, approving that new coal mine so we don't have to import coal from Russia.... assuming they'll still sell it to us.

V8

chrissyr wrote:Does he understand what he does?

Chris

I suspect the answer is yes.

What he does, more than anything else, is damage-limitation on his boss's flights of fancy.

Well, apart from the Freeports thing, which appear to be his own nonsense (and backhanders for his mates).

MrFoolish wrote:

Dod101 wrote:The government since it came to power has scarcely had a 'normal' week to understand what on earth is going on, and most of its ministers had no experience of government before all this hit.

Dod

Yeah, it is so stretched for time that it's concentrating on the important stuff. Like privatising Channel 4. And bringing back pounds and ounces. (Whilst blaming Kier Starmer for everything.)

Cynicism is a very unattractive trait.

Dod

UncleEbenezer wrote:

chrissyr wrote:Does he understand what he does?

Chris

I suspect the answer is yes.

What he does, more than anything else, is damage-limitation on his boss's flights of fancy.

Well, apart from the Freeports thing, which appear to be his own nonsense (and backhanders for his mates).

Why do you say that Freeports are a nonsense? I do not know enough about how they work but they seem quite a good idea to me.

Dod

Freeports historically tend to displace economic activity from surrounding areas.

Private Eye has had a fair bit to say on the subject. And on specific issues like giving it to his mates in Teesside as opposed to the more obvious Tyneside, which just doesn't happen to be his mates.

Note that Freeports ceased to exist in Blighty only as recently as 2012. But before then they were at least not consuming the current wave of fanfare and pork-barrel.

UncleEbenezer wrote:Freeports historically tend to displace economic activity from surrounding areas.

Private Eye has had a fair bit to say on the subject. And on specific issues like giving it to his mates in Teesside as opposed to the more obvious Tyneside, which just doesn't happen to be his mates.

Having recently been to the area it did seem to me that Teeside is a lot more deprived than Tyneside. Newcastle struck me as a lively and confident city whereas Middlesbrough (and its even more dire neighbours Stockton-on-Tees and Hartlepool) looked more in need of help.

Of course these were just the passing reflections of a Southerner wondering where all the sushi places were.

Lootman wrote:

UncleEbenezer wrote:Freeports historically tend to displace economic activity from surrounding areas.

Private Eye has had a fair bit to say on the subject. And on specific issues like giving it to his mates in Teesside as opposed to the more obvious Tyneside, which just doesn't happen to be his mates.

Having recently been to the area it did seem to me that Teeside is a lot more deprived than Tyneside. Newcastle struck me as a lively and confident city whereas Middlesbrough (and its even more dire neighbours Stockton-on-Tees and Hartlepool) looked more in need of help.

Of course these were just the passing reflections of a Southerner wondering where all the sushi places were.

So Freeports should be an element of Social Policy?

No argument with Canny Newcastle looking great, though the same can't be said of all the Tyneside conurbation.

Not familiar with any of the Teesside places you mention (and I can believe they're deprived), but my recollection of Darlington is of a fairly attractive place - albeit an utterly incomprehensible language that makes broad Weegie sound like the Queen's English.

Neither does it affect the slush funds merrygoround: Taxpayer bungs to Rishi's mates in charge of the Teesside scheme, who in turn make their Party donations.

UncleEbenezer wrote:

Lootman wrote:

UncleEbenezer wrote:Freeports historically tend to displace economic activity from surrounding areas.

Private Eye has had a fair bit to say on the subject. And on specific issues like giving it to his mates in Teesside as opposed to the more obvious Tyneside, which just doesn't happen to be his mates.

Having recently been to the area it did seem to me that Teeside is a lot more deprived than Tyneside. Newcastle struck me as a lively and confident city whereas Middlesbrough (and its even more dire neighbours Stockton-on-Tees and Hartlepool) looked more in need of help.

Of course these were just the passing reflections of a Southerner wondering where all the sushi places were.

No argument with Canny Newcastle looking great, though the same can't be said of all the Tyneside conurbation.

Not familiar with any of the Teesside places you mention (and I can believe they're deprived), but my recollection of Darlington is of a fairly attractive place - albeit an utterly incomprehensible language that makes broad Weegie sound like the Queen's English.

Neither does it affect the slush funds merrygoround: Taxpayer bungs to Rishi's mates in charge of the Teesside scheme, who in turn make their Party donations.

Surely even this government wouldn't be so mad as to make Darlington a freeport?

Dod101 wrote:Why do you say that Freeports are a nonsense? I do not know enough about how they work but they seem quite a good idea to me.

That's part of the trouble, to the uninitiated they feel like a vaguel good thing but trade experts think they're a bit of a waste of time for a country like the UK which has low tariffs already, as has been mentioned they just move employment and economic activity into the freeport that would have happened anyway in surrounding areas, whilst reducing tax revenue for the Treasury. That's why we got rid of the ones we had a decade ago - they were never banned by the EU as some like to make out.

This is a pretty balanced article on the pros and cons :
https://www.politicshome.com/thehouse/a ... -explained

Hallucigenia wrote:

Dod101 wrote:Why do you say that Freeports are a nonsense? I do not know enough about how they work but they seem quite a good idea to me.

That's part of the trouble, to the uninitiated they feel like a vaguel good thing but trade experts think they're a bit of a waste of time for a country like the UK which has low tariffs already, as has been mentioned they just move employment and economic activity into the freeport that would have happened anyway in surrounding areas, whilst reducing tax revenue for the Treasury. That's why we got rid of the ones we had a decade ago - they were never banned by the EU as some like to make out.

This is a pretty balanced article on the pros and cons :

I am quite prepared to accept that I am uninitiated on the subject of freeports but I am not sure that I would simply accept the views of one article either. Still, it all helps to add to the educational process.

Dod

Well, the Times and the Telegraph appear to be reporting that Mr Sunak has had to borrow money last month in order to pay interest on the national debt. If that's true, it takes us back to the Callaghan/Healey era of UK national finance. The country really is starting to feel like it's the 1970's all over again to me.

Snorvey wrote:The 'debt' is mostly owed to ourselves though. And the 'deficit' is just money that's been saved/not spent by the citizens.....
I think COP26 is going out the window quick smart.

Yes, that can is being disgracefully kicked down the road disastrously quick smart.
Not that I should care, we'll be OK and we have no children.

The debt.... in May, public sector net borrowing, excluding public sector banks, was £14bn, the third-highest May figure since records began in 1993. The figure was down £4bn on May 2021, but £8.5bn higher than May 2019.
It was also £3.6bn higher than the OBR's own forecast.
Central government receipts were £66bn, up £5.7bn on May 2021. Of that, £48.3bn were tax receipts, a £3.4bn annual increase. But debt interest was £7.6bn, up £3.1bn year-on-year and £2.5bn higher than the OBR’s expectations.

So if that £7.6bn is mostly owed to ourselves, where's my share?

V8

If Brexit had been dismissed as stupid nonsense by a sensible citizenry, we would all be here thanking God that the Brexiteers lost the vote (and we would not have a government of fourth rate nobodies).

Snorvey wrote:I'm no expert, but we've kicked the can down the road for decades. As have many other countries. The UK, Japan, the USA and so on.

And if the last 13 years of monetary shenanigans have shown anything it's that the UK going bankrupt is really just a figment of the popular press's imagination. The constraint is resources, not currency.

I kind of think it's possible you're right, but having lived through sick man of Europe times I fear you're not.

If we could persuade everyone that there's a bank on Mars that's lending us huge amounts of dosh at zero interest rate, and interest only, there wouldn't be a problem with debt and deficit, it'd be an other world problem.

Snorvey wrote:The constraint is resources, not currency.

Well we have plenty of immigrants.
What we need is some good old-fashioned Ancient Slavery. Just abolish the Race Relations Act and the Modern Slavery Act then we can really get cracking.
And galleys are carbon zero.
I think you may be onto something.

V8