Never been more unhappy about being 100% right

[Devils_Advocate]

I would rather none took the p**S

The trouble is that to ensure nobody takes the p*ss you have to put in such tight and stringent measures that you end up rejecting support for people who genuinely need it which is what has happened with Iain Duncan Smiths disastrous and cruel Universal Credit system.

Im simplifying but you often have a choice between a system that allows 1000 people to take the p*ss but gives essential support to a 1000 people who genuinely need it or you have a system where maybe only 100 of the original 1000 people are able to take the p*ss but only 500 of the original 1000 people get the support they need.

It boils down to whether you would prefer a system that supports 1000 genuine people at a cost of 1000 people taking the p*ss or would you prefer a system where only 100 people are able to take the p*ss but at a cost of 500 desperate people not getting the support they need.

The Tory's through their actions have confirmed they prefer the latter but I would much rather prioritise people who need support getting support even if it means some bast*rds are able to take the p*ss.

Not sure which you would prefer but unfortunately there isn't a perfect system for getting it right 100% of the time so you have to pick which is the better of the two options for how you think our country should work and look after the poor and vulnerable

[fidelcastro]

Same old Tories looking out for their mates.

[ClaretPete001]

He's not an expert though is he?

He has very strong ideas about the economy, and how to grow it, but nothing to suggest he's an expert on it

The majority of experts don't agree with him, and even those that share some of his views look at the current ecomomic situation and and are saying

"This is a huge gamble"

He's an investment banker who is prepared to take huge gambles with other people's assets; generally speaking that constitutes expertise on this board.

The last time we had such a gamble was under Ted Heath in the early 70s and it was somewhat of a disaster.

Ironically, we also had a fuel crisis and relatively full employment at the time. Only the swivel eyed loons of the Tory faithful could view Truss and Kwarteng as serious players in politics.

And in terms of fairness, the only people that could make them look good is the Labour front bench.

All we need now is Paul to come along and declare it exciting times and the metaphor would be complete......!

[dsr]

He's not an expert though is he?

He has very strong ideas about the economy, and how to grow it, but nothing to suggest he's an expert on it

The majority of experts don't agree with him, and even those that share some of his views look at the current ecomomic situation and and are saying

"This is a huge gamble"

How do you become an expert? He's got a Cambridge PhD in economic history, he's published at least one book about economics, he's worked in economics-related government departments for several years, he's got all the Treasury advice to call on. Isn't that enough?

[CleggHall]

He’s a very clever boy, been on University Challenge.

[Lancasterclaret]

How do you become an expert? He's got a Cambridge PhD in economic history, he's published at least one book about economics, he's worked in economics-related government departments for several years, he's got all the Treasury advice to call on. Isn't that enough?

What was his book about Dsr?

Why no OBR forecast?

[SammyBoy]

Isn't welfare/benefit fraud a relative insignificance in the grand scheme of the public purse? I was under the impression these tax cuts would likely be funded by budget cuts to the public sector. Essentially your average worker will be getting a sweet £20 a month tax break at the detriment of the NHS, policing, schools etc - or am I misguided?

[Lancasterclaret]

Isn't welfare/benefit fraud a relative insignificance in the grand scheme of the public purse? I was under the impression these tax cuts would likely be funded by budget cuts to the public sector. Essentially your average worker will be getting a sweet £20 a month tax break at the detriment of the NHS, policing, schools etc - or am I misguided?

They say not

But with borrowing sky high already, and the pound and gilt markets absolutely tanking (free market economy in action), you really do wonder sadly

[NottsClaret]

I have a joke about trickle down economics. 99% of you won't ever get it.*




*yes, I know it's stolen.

[claretandy]

That is a huge compliment btw

Not really, I don't think you go around drunkenly telling a Muslim man to "eff off and go and kill more people" like O'Brien did to maajid nawaz.

[aggi]

The trouble is that to ensure nobody takes the p*ss you have to put in such tight and stringent measures that you end up rejecting support for people who genuinely need it which is what has happened with Iain Duncan Smiths disastrous and cruel Universal Credit system.

Im simplifying but you often have a choice between a system that allows 1000 people to take the p*ss but gives essential support to a 1000 people who genuinely need it or you have a system where maybe only 100 of the original 1000 people are able to take the p*ss but only 500 of the original 1000 people get the support they need.

It boils down to whether you would prefer a system that supports 1000 genuine people at a cost of 1000 people taking the p*ss or would you prefer a system where only 100 people are able to take the p*ss but at a cost of 500 desperate people not getting the support they need.

The Tory's through their actions have confirmed they prefer the latter but I would much rather prioritise people who need support getting support even if it means some bast*rds are able to take the p*ss.

Not sure which you would prefer but unfortunately there isn't a perfect system for getting it right 100% of the time so you have to pick which is the better of the two options for how you think our country should work and look after the poor and vulnerable

There is another option. You can spend more on enforcement than you'll save by cracking down.

[Lancasterclaret]

Not really, I don't think you go around drunkenly telling a Muslim man to "eff off and go and kill more people" like O'Brien did to maajid nawaz.

I don't think he does either

But you know that

[Lancasterclaret]

https://twitter.com/PippaCrerar/status/ ... 8814433281

Oh (one for claretandy there)

[dsr]

What was his book about Dsr?

Why no OBR forecast?

"In 2014, his book War and Gold: A Five-Hundred-Year History of Empires, Adventures and Debt was published. It is a history of capital and the enduring ability of money, when combined with speculation, to ruin societies." (Wikipedia)

I don't know why no OBR forecast.

[Lancasterclaret]

"In 2014, his book War and Gold: A Five-Hundred-Year History of Empires, Adventures and Debt was published. It is a history of capital and the enduring ability of money, when combined with speculation, to ruin societies." (Wikipedia)

I don't know why no OBR forecast.

Didn't he co-author another one? (that one does sound interesting btw!)

[RMutt]

It has the feeling of a smash and grab raid before they need to buy the votes of poorer people with a few morsels nearer to the next election.

[Shaggy]

Lancaster is 100% right? And here’s me thinking he was all
The way to the left.

[blake's wand]

Nobody makes intentionally bad economic decisions. there are no easy decisions to be made at the moment, the whole world is struggling. For every expert that thinks it is a bad idea, there is an expert that thinks it's a good one.

The biggest problem is that it's difficult to make the 'tough' decisions because of how unpopular they would be for the election

[ClaretPete001]

Isn't welfare/benefit fraud a relative insignificance in the grand scheme of the public purse? I was under the impression these tax cuts would likely be funded by budget cuts to the public sector. Essentially your average worker will be getting a sweet £20 a month tax break at the detriment of the NHS, policing, schools etc - or am I misguided?

I suppose the counter argument would be that if things stay the same and we enter prolonged recession then you would still have cuts to services but without the £20.

The are two problems caused by the fuel crisis (1) low demand (2) inflation.

The Tories have a package of measure to deal with both.

On the other hand, the Tories have now introduced a stimulus in terms of tax cuts. And of course, on the other they have the fuel plan.

So, that is the BIG plan.

It could fail for two reasons:

1) it lacks credibility and the markets simply decide the British economy is a dog, as happened in the 70s

2) The stimulus doesn't work because those that receive the benefits of tax cuts don't need to spend more and those that do need to spend more don't receive much in the way of tax cuts.

So, the demand problem is not solved and we end up in a huge recession collecting even less tax revenue than we did before.

[martin_p]

Nobody makes intentionally bad economic decisions. there are no easy decisions to be made at the moment, the whole world is struggling. For every expert that thinks it is a bad idea, there is an expert that thinks it's a good one.

How do you fathom that?

[ClaretPete001]

Nobody makes intentionally bad economic decisions. there are no easy decisions to be made at the moment, the whole world is struggling. For every expert that thinks it is a bad idea, there is an expert that thinks it's a good one.

The biggest problem is that it's difficult to make the 'tough' decisions because of how unpopular they would be for the election

Not sure that is true - Liz Truss made a big play about the failings of economic orthodoxy.

[claretandy]

I don't think he does either

But you know that

Well maajid is suing him, so we'll find out soon enough.

[Burnley Ace]

Didn't he co-author another one? (that one does sound interesting btw!)

Britannia Unchained https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britannia_Unchained

[Lancasterclaret]

https://twitter.com/PJTheEconomist/stat ... 9551913984

More oh

[Lancasterclaret]

Britannia Unchained https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britannia_Unchained

Thats the fella!

Well worth a read if you want to know why all this is happening

[Lancasterclaret]

Well maajid is suing him, so we'll find out soon enough.

Hasn't Maajid completely lost the plot in the past couple of years?

[aggi]

Nobody makes intentionally bad economic decisions. there are no easy decisions to be made at the moment, the whole world is struggling. For every expert that thinks it is a bad idea, there is an expert that thinks it's a good one.

The biggest problem is that it's difficult to make the 'tough' decisions because of how unpopular they would be for the election

Or you can just make economic decisions that favour different groups of people. There's no grand plan out there to keep everybody happy.

[Devils_Advocate]

There is another option. You can spend more on enforcement than you'll save by cracking down.

Of course with immigration being a perfect example. What are we doing electing a govt who were/are willing to spend far more money on shipping asylum seekers off to Rwanda than it would cost them to invest in a system that offered safe routes, processed claims quickly, got the genuine refugees approved and working and paying into our economy whilst deporting the false claimants back to their home country.

But of course optics to a certain base of people is far better than actually implementing a better solution for the country as a whole