By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Can anyone explain how a £20 Billion Black hole on 10:53 - Dec 1 by JammyDodgerrr
You can't function on a surplus of £4.2 billion, there was still 16bn less than needed. It really wasn't misleading, it's just semantics.
Quite, and guess what that £16 billion equates to?
This from the Economist’s Matthew Holehouse.
"It was the most botched budget briefing since Truss… but this is increasingly wild. It is not an unsubstantiated “claim” that the OBR priced the productivity downgrade at £16bn in foregone revenue!"
As it is, Labour don't really stand a chance with the right wing media making up stories, disparaging them and setting the agenda since they came to power.
I say this as someone who has been very critical of certain things they have done but the abolition of the two child benefit cap is to commended, as is their desire to maintain rather than cut public spending, given the appalling state of public services.
[Post edited 1 Dec 13:22]
3
Can anyone explain how a £20 Billion Black hole on 11:21 - Dec 1 with 474 views
Can anyone explain how a £20 Billion Black hole on 11:45 - Dec 1 by bartyg
What's the benefit of the government running on a surplus anyway?
It's not a savings account.
Well, the Tories would use it to fund tax cuts just before an Election, and Starmer could use it to make promises to disgruntled MPs to make "structural funds" available to invest in their constituencies, timed for maximum benefit before the next Election.
Under Sunak, the Tories actually did this with structural funds targeted to some of their vulnerable constituencies in Middle England, but it obviously didn't work!
Can anyone explain how a £20 Billion Black hole on 11:45 - Dec 1 by bartyg
What's the benefit of the government running on a surplus anyway?
It's not a savings account.
It isn't a current surplus, it's a projected surplus, taking into account billions in debt interest payments.
And given OBR forecasts are rarely, if ever, right, trying to sell to the bond markets a £4 billion surplus wouldn't have gone down well.
Indeed, the relatively positive reaction to the Budget by the bond markets is something that the Government is getting no credit for, given gloomy articles in the the right wing media about high bond yields.
Indeed, when it comes to a black hole the right wing media have themselves been projecting £30 billion or more these last few months, and are presumably disappointed things haven't turned out worse.
Of course, the Tories might well have accepted the £4 billion figure had they been in power and on the back of that gone for tax cuts and savage spending cuts to build up a greater surplus but I don't think that would have been the best way forward.
Can anyone explain how a £20 Billion Black hole on 13:21 - Dec 1 by DJR
It isn't a current surplus, it's a projected surplus, taking into account billions in debt interest payments.
And given OBR forecasts are rarely, if ever, right, trying to sell to the bond markets a £4 billion surplus wouldn't have gone down well.
Indeed, the relatively positive reaction to the Budget by the bond markets is something that the Government is getting no credit for, given gloomy articles in the the right wing media about high bond yields.
Indeed, when it comes to a black hole the right wing media have themselves been projecting £30 billion or more these last few months, and are presumably disappointed things haven't turned out worse.
Of course, the Tories might well have accepted the £4 billion figure had they been in power and on the back of that gone for tax cuts and savage spending cuts to build up a greater surplus but I don't think that would have been the best way forward.
[Post edited 1 Dec 13:23]
Goodness, the people desperate to come out with Neoclassical takes on how the consolidated fund at the BoE works is quite frightening. Barty's comment has flown straight over your head. Neoclassical economics fails to explain anything in macroeconomics and the equations are boarding on insane, I certainly couldn't coupled them to a climate model and get that published in a physics journal.
Could you explain the origin of money and how it flows around the economy? I actually had a chap say to me that taxpayers create Pound Sterling; that is illegal in the UK. Their was another person who claimed Reform wanted to stop interest being paid on bonds held at banks; it is reserves. I built a very coarse model of monetary flows coupled to energy and materials several years ago and the experts at UCL helped explain how the government funding actually works. There is no big pot taxes go into as the balances in the CF are nil at the end of each day.
Even at a basic level this is quite a challenge to build a coherent model (I had many iterations trying to get it to work) and yet people speak with such certainty about it.
0
Can anyone explain how a £20 Billion Black hole on 14:21 - Dec 1 with 238 views
Can anyone explain how a £20 Billion Black hole on 14:08 - Dec 1 by CoachRob
Goodness, the people desperate to come out with Neoclassical takes on how the consolidated fund at the BoE works is quite frightening. Barty's comment has flown straight over your head. Neoclassical economics fails to explain anything in macroeconomics and the equations are boarding on insane, I certainly couldn't coupled them to a climate model and get that published in a physics journal.
Could you explain the origin of money and how it flows around the economy? I actually had a chap say to me that taxpayers create Pound Sterling; that is illegal in the UK. Their was another person who claimed Reform wanted to stop interest being paid on bonds held at banks; it is reserves. I built a very coarse model of monetary flows coupled to energy and materials several years ago and the experts at UCL helped explain how the government funding actually works. There is no big pot taxes go into as the balances in the CF are nil at the end of each day.
Even at a basic level this is quite a challenge to build a coherent model (I had many iterations trying to get it to work) and yet people speak with such certainty about it.
In my defence, I am no economist, and had thought about adding at the end of my post "Happy to be corrected by someone who knows more about these things."
EDIT: By way of further defence, I was basing my comments on what I understood to be Rachel Reeves' fiscal rules (which in the scheme of things probably aren't much different to the rule the Tories would have).
I am also aware, say, of criticism from the IFS that the fiscal rules more generally are too rigid, and further criticism that they could be loosened.
But you may well be talking about something else.
[Post edited 1 Dec 17:28]
0
Can anyone explain how a £20 Billion Black hole on 14:56 - Dec 1 with 204 views
I just wish politicians would stop telling lies, burying bad news, adopting Trump’s ‘post truth’, play the blame game, write inaccurate and stoopid slogans on buses and just for once try telling the truth. They’ve been doing this for decades and it’s little wonder most people have neither respect or belief in them.
The second fallout of this is that people naturally look for alternatives and that’s precisely how lying bit of scum like Farage, or The trumpmeister in America, get elected.
2
Can anyone explain how a £20 Billion Black hole on 15:34 - Dec 1 with 177 views
Can anyone explain how a £20 Billion Black hole on 10:53 - Dec 1 by JammyDodgerrr
You can't function on a surplus of £4.2 billion, there was still 16bn less than needed. It really wasn't misleading, it's just semantics.
It does seem like a thing political correspondents worry about and not the general public so much
The Tories had a gaffe virtually every week where you'd expect a resignation and nothing came, they can crow all they like about resignations but don't have a lot of credit in the bank on this one
Alcohol is the answer but I can't remember the question!
Can anyone explain how a £20 Billion Black hole on 14:08 - Dec 1 by CoachRob
Goodness, the people desperate to come out with Neoclassical takes on how the consolidated fund at the BoE works is quite frightening. Barty's comment has flown straight over your head. Neoclassical economics fails to explain anything in macroeconomics and the equations are boarding on insane, I certainly couldn't coupled them to a climate model and get that published in a physics journal.
Could you explain the origin of money and how it flows around the economy? I actually had a chap say to me that taxpayers create Pound Sterling; that is illegal in the UK. Their was another person who claimed Reform wanted to stop interest being paid on bonds held at banks; it is reserves. I built a very coarse model of monetary flows coupled to energy and materials several years ago and the experts at UCL helped explain how the government funding actually works. There is no big pot taxes go into as the balances in the CF are nil at the end of each day.
Even at a basic level this is quite a challenge to build a coherent model (I had many iterations trying to get it to work) and yet people speak with such certainty about it.
Hi Coach, I'm glad you replied to this, as I was thinking 'wouldn't a surplus eventually be essential to stop the UK debt just growing ever larger?'
Any chance you could explain in layman terms why we shouldn't worry about debt or the cost of servicing that debt?
(Btw, I honestly did try and read your paper on this last time we interacted - I'm afraid it was a little over my head)
Has anyone ever looked at their own postings for last day or so? Oh my... so sorry. Was Ullaa
Can anyone explain how a £20 Billion Black hole on 10:53 - Dec 1 by JammyDodgerrr
You can't function on a surplus of £4.2 billion, there was still 16bn less than needed. It really wasn't misleading, it's just semantics.
She is trying to hide behind the headroom excuse. I have never heard that mentioned so much in a budget, and if so it was low key. 20bn is fairly standard requirement for headroom. and is obviously good to have, but she has been dishonest about it, when it was completely unnecessary. Pretty silly really.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
