The bottom line is there’s no realistic solution and nobody on either side, no matter how loud they shout, has one that’s practical within the confines of our financial establishment. If this timid Labour government is “spooking” the markets, then we are truly fucked. That means no party can actually enact the changes this country needs - not the Greens, not Reform, not Corbyn, not Labour, not the Tories… if anytime spending increases (or economic changes are made to break from the status quo) and as a result the financial markets get “spooked” and begin to crash, then it seems we are just forever doomed to austerity. And that’s not doomerism, that is just the reality of the fiscal rules we are apparently bound to in modern Britain. Even if Corbyn’s Labour or the Green Party won a majority and were able to enact just a fraction of their massive spending plans that this country needs, they’d “spook the markets” and crash the economy, on a similar level to Liz Truss, and then this would harm normal people as the rich “investors” lose “confidence” in the UK economy - obviously the toxic UK media would also pounce on this and essentially end the government in the end. Same for if Reform or the Tories get a chance, it’ll either be the exact same as what Liz Truss did and they’ll also “spook the markets” or, as mentioned above, more austerity which ultimately ends in a dead economy anyways. The fiscal rules need to be broken - but it takes a party with balls to do that, for the media to be on side, and for the British people to put up with higher mortgages etc for a bit to see it through (unfortunately because of rich “investors” losing “confidence” in the UK economy, the average joe would have to suffer first) - all of which are things that I don’t see happening anytime soon.
The trouble is the Wet Tories from Cameron to Sunak, enacted New Labour policies: high tax, high spend, high borrowing. For all the talk of "austerity" it didn't actually, really happen. They sanctioned a few on the brew but that was it. If the Tories had slashed spending and tax, i.e. Thatcherite, then Labour could have come in on a tax and spend basis claiming the Tories had starved the country. But they did the opposite. So there is no leeway for significant tax rise or significant borrowing rise. What neither of them will do, can do, is make the state more efficient. There is immense bureaucracy and waste, but nobody knows how to tackle it. When we had quills and 1/4 of the globe to manage we also had 1/10th of the current civil servants. As the country has shrunk, as information technology and paperless offices have made things more efficient, our civil service has gone up by a full factor. That is to say a full decimal point. It isn't sustainable, and looking at the current parties, not fixable either.
@@kierannewell6253 absolute bothsides-ism drivel. The country has been afloat for 700 years without going under like some banana republic or on the 7th of whatever republic of France we're up to now. Given the choice between parties at least wanting to try and follow the democratically decided principals of this country and not being great at it Vs a group of A) opportunistic toffs or B) Crazies there is definitely an **objective** choice to be made. When people call for the country to be saved they picture a utopia and for it to have been built yesterday. It actually takes decades, multiple successive governments and strong partizan policies. There are certain parties that aren't even offering that, yet you say they're all the same. 🫠
@@AvocadoAfficionado no I agree, I’m not saying there’s not a choice or a better of evils or anything like that - my point is, no party or ideology can enact any sort of meaningful ECONOMIC change within the confines of these fiscal rules we follow where a small % of rich investors want to maintain the status quo and will gladly crash the economy if anyone threatens there “happy days” with meaningful change. So no, it’s not bothsideism - it’s a realistic problem that any side will have to contend with. Change IS possible if we break the chain but it will be painful - that’s it.
The british economy is a shit show, and a couple months under Keir Starmer is not changing that fact because this has been created over decades, since Thatcher. What are people expecting of the new government, and how can labour expect to change anything without being able to fundamentally change the rules!
Thatcher left the economy in very good shape. Major, himself economically to the left of Blair, mismanaged it and Soros pounced on it. Blair was was bad but in different ways. The Tories continued the Barite revolution, NOT the Thatcherite one.
@@darthkek1953 Many of the current problems have their roots in the damaging legacy of the Blair years. The Tories' biggest failing was either not attempting to fix them or doing a remarkably poor job of it.
@@Nerdy4Life Bots, bots everywhere. Thatcher selling off every asset the country had and making you buy/rent it back to the benefit of some offshore owner is why you're poor. Thinking Soros had anything to do with it is hilarious conspiracy level crazy
@@darthkek1953thatcher destroyed the country, she sold everything off and began this stupid Americanisation of our society. We used to own all public services and utilities etc etc etc. now we own nothing, it’s embarrassing.
@@Deathstrider We are in a wild ride because 14 years of right wing sabotaging the UK and you want another right wing to lead UK again… typical Reformer
Also Liz Truss criticising Rachel Reeves for her handling of the economy is a bit like Timothy McVeigh criticising the Unabomber for causing loss of life 😂
@@reheyesd8666 in order to do that we must first privatize everything: roads, school, health care, railroads, the army, everything, because our taxes are used to maintain those things. If companies own everything, the goverment doesn't need to collect taxes. The companies can maintain those things
Truss' budget was the polar opposite of Reeves and would have led to growth. Alas, the media persuaded the public it was awful and now we have Labour again and more financial pain. The Bank of England admitted it was mostly to blame for the market problems in May 24.
If you think this is Blairism you are clueless. Blair actually ran a surplus in his first term and presided over the most prosperous economic period in UK history
Honestly I've watched several of her podcasts and my opinion on her completely changed. If you go beyond headlines and news coverage some politicians are very different to how they're represented. There's more to the story than "she fucked up". Really shady shit.
Truss' budget was the polar opposite of Reeves and would have led to growth. Alas, the media persuaded the public it was awful and now we have Labour again and more financial pain. The Bank of England admitted it was mostly to blame for the market problems in May 24.
The UK isn't a primary resource producer, not in any significant degree. Sure, there's the fisheries and North Sea oil, but agriculture, forestry, fishing, mining... They're all less than 2% of the UK's total economic output. The UK manufacturing sector, meanwhile, is close to 10% of the UK's economic output, with consumables (food, beverages, tobacco) at the top of the list, followed by motor vehicles, machinery, etc. The UK has a lot of skilled labour in that regard, and it's that skilled workforce that is basically the UK's one ticket to economic relevance. The Union is not a banana republic that can get by on basic commodity exports and resource extraction, it has to actually produce high quality workmanship products. If you want the UK economy to grow, the first thing to do would be reversing Brexit and getting the UK back into the common market, so that its products are more competitive. If you want the UK economy to grow, the second thing to do would be trying to identify economic sectors which the UK is well-equipped to service due to an history of expertise, like specialist aircraft part manufacture. Create targeted investment aimed at communities that have undergone historic decay due to the decline of manufacturing, especially in the North, and offer companies public-private partnerships that guarantee the government a share of the profits in exchange for covering a large section of the costs of opening a new manufacturing facility. Likewise, create training programs for jobs at those facilities at local universities and cover the tuition for them (maybe prioritize applicants from council estates). If you want the UK economy to grow, the third thing to do would be to build as much new council housing as possible. Get rid of the Thatcher era reforms and let councils (A) raise their own taxes and (B) build a larger council housing supply. This will bring down rents, which will bring down the cost of land, which will make it easier to build and develop, which will reduce UK infrastructure costs. It'll give people more money to spend in their local economy, make it easier for them to get on the property ladder, and reduce speculator investment in property, freeing up money for use in the actual economy. Alas, I doubt Keir Starmer is reading a comment section. But if you're in the UK, write to your local MP and tell them this is what you want to see and get your friends and family to do the same.
The irony of Liz Truss accusing Labour of nearly crashing the economy is hard to miss lol If anyone isn’t qualified to talk about the economy, it’s Lettuce Liz
Truss' budget was the polar opposite of Reeves and would have led to growth. Alas, the media persuaded the public it was awful and now we have Labour again and more financial pain. The Bank of England admitted it was mostly to blame for the market problems in May 24.
@@floriandebontdelbarre2700 truss was right The economy under Labour is worse than under Truss The difference is that the establishment are not trying to undermine Labour
"Liz Truss style crisis". Please read the facts. The Bank of England admitted in May 24 that it was largely to blame and hence Truss's lawyers have now sent a letter to Starmer asking he desist for perpetuating what he knows to be false. This channel is doing the same. The Truss was the polar opposite of Reeves and, while the markets had a little shake, we would not be in the problems we are today if the media, including this channel, both understood the economics and told the truth.
It's completely normal for state liabilities to lower in value when the perceived financial situation of the state worsens. All of this was very easy to anticipate after the last budget. When you take measures that increase spending (short and long term) so dramatically over revenue increases. And you increase your revenue by damaging the growth prospects of your economy, then you get yourself in a vicious cycle of stagnation and resistant inflation (due to fiscal deficit -> injecting currency) plus you keep higher interest rates (less private investment). The more the state spends, the less the private sector can invest. It is honestly quite a simple thing, and really going for growth would be quite simple as well. But the more time passes, the less I think this government knows how to do anything properly....
The worst thing labour could do is run about in panic, as stated in the video this is mostly a combination of international factors and investor confidence. With the chaos of Trump, instability of France and likely instability of Germany having a set and steady plan and not budging is the best move.
Labour is not. Gilt yields are rising globally and is set to fall again. Liz Truss criticising labour for the economic crisis when Lettuce crashed the economy 😂
Truss' budget was the polar opposite of Reeves and would have led to growth. Alas, the media persuaded the public it was awful and now we have Labour again and more financial pain. The Bank of England admitted it was mostly to blame for the market problems in May 24.
Something I find incredible is that people will forget *14 years* of economic mismanagement, austerity, honestly terrible foreign policy and public neglect. All to harass the government *the public voted for* that hasn't even had half a year of their five year term. What did people want from them? for Labour to wave a magic wand and everything be fixed in an instant?
I heard someone honestly say the public hasnt been this angry with government since the poll-tax which has to be the most insane thing I've ever heard. The right wing are amplifying this like crazy to try and convince people with little knowledge of economics that this is a extinction level event and we need another election after just 6 months after years of "NO REFERENDUMZ, NO-RE-DO, WILL OF THE PEEPOLE" Yes, markets move. No this isn't GFE 2.0 or even in the same league as the "minibudget". Having supposedly centerist outlets covering the story in this way is insane.
They got less than 30% of the vote. They are harrassing the countryside, that's about all they're doing. People are correct not to expect anything good come from this.
It's not news. People vote poorly for the best part of 20 years, then expect not to suffer from the long term consequences of their own choices and for someone to come down and fix it all overnight scoff free.
Governments can manage their fiscal policies through three primary methods: curtailing public expenditure, issuing debt, and engaging in monetary expansion . Press (C) for cuts; (B) for borrow; or (P) for print.
This assumes state has entirely passive role in economy. State can also: - redistribute taxed money with wages it pays - engage in public-private projects to enable growth on private sector - invest in public structures and utilities that facilitate the economy - subsidise industries, utilities, wages, or similar to maintain the economic state or to facilitate growth. Wages the state pays act similarly to wages private sector pays, by enabling consumption and injecting liquidity to the local economy those employees take part in. The production state engages in might not collect a profit, but it can still generate value: if for example the education of graduated students makes their labour more valuable, it can (and generally does) outweight the work it took to educate them. Those are just some ways the state takes active role in the national economy. State also is responsible for facilitating ALL exports and imports, by mutual agreements with other states or economic zones. Here is the kicker: we don’t actually measure government finances in absolute terms. We measure them against the economy they facilitate. Government debt and new liquidity are absolutely crucial parts of monetary circulation, so the goal isn’t to get rid of them completely. The economy needs government bonds as safe investment to balance risk, while printing no new money while the economy grows and produces more and more stuff would lead to absolutely brutal deflation.
Austerity after 2010 failed to bring down the debt to gdp ratio because ...... It wasn't austere. We were spending more than raised in tax Public sector was greater share of gdp every single year post 2010 to today than was in any year from 97-07. So not austere.
When youtubers try to understand economics, The markets aren't responding to recent Labour policies but they are responding to long term downward trends bought about by Tory austerity.
6 months into Starmer’s term, dogged at every turn by scandal and failure, yet still fortunately everything is still the Tories’ fault. Will his luck hold out or will some point in the next 4 and a half years see this excuse start to lose potency?
They are borrowing it from millionaires and billionaires. This is the giant con most haven't trigged onto. The ultra wealthy have transferred their tax liability into government loans whereby they now get paid interest on the money they give over, which is still classified as being theirs. All of this can be fixed very very easily by just taxing the wealthy at the level everybody else is being taxed at, something progressives have been telling people for years now. But no, most are happy to continue with this weird economic system of socialism for the ultra rich and rugged bootstraps vulture capitalism for everybody else.
Banks, investment firms, pension funds, and private investors, for the most part. You could buy gilts yourself, if you really wanted to (although that's not financial advice lol)
The Super Rich who own the institutions that lend to governments. Who are the same institutions who own and are buying up all the land and property with the idea to essentially rent everything out at far higher costs than they would cost before being bought by them. The money is basically being leeched out of the system. By the super rich.
Only half true just because the market is increasing doesn’t mean Uks cost are still far higher than for example germanys currently and it’s naive to suggest reeves didn’t massively contribute as she was warned her that budget would impact the borrowing markets
The UK was dead once they left the EU and didn't establish any real trade deals with other nations. Things just get more expensive when trade is more expensive. Plus the world as a whole is stagnant at the moment. I think we are close to a global recession.
True, but they're scared to state that brexit was a terrible idea and that we'll not make money. If they had the ⚽️⚽️⚽️ then they would actively say brexit helped damage us and that the only way to get back to strength is by going back into the eu.
@@SDDT25 It hasn’t even been half a year yet check the date on those graphs and it’s pretty obvious it’s just the lingering effects of the previous and global instability.
I've heard a couple of economists say recently, that a lot of this is down to the bank of England going through a process of 'quantitative tightening'. They're basically selling more bonds into the market. They could simply slow down the rate they're flooding the market with bonds to alleviate the rise in costs.
There is a correlation between a TLDR having a clickbaity title question and the answer to said title question is a solid no. Also the new 2025 intro sucks. Other than that the content inside the video is solid as ever.
I bet Starmer thinks the bond markets are far right as well. There’s a reason why the bond vigilantes are out - despite rising bond yields globally, in the UK specifically, it speaks to growing concerns regarding government's borrow/spend agenda and fiscal prudence, but also growth momentum fading fast with little confidence in that being corrected near term. At this point a good chunk of the problems in the UK are due to a man named Andrew Bailey. The smoking gun is also the BoE, and the role of active QT over the past two years. Selling truckloads of QE gilts into an already oversupplied gilt market. IMF has pointed out how the BoE QT announcements have been far more destabilizing for gilt markets than other central banks Edit: 30 year gilts haven’t touched 5.4% since 1998, not 2008.
Trouble is that when in opposition she talked the talk on growth, which the market liked. When in power they were unprepared and settled strikes with generous pay settlements, and her budget was disappointing for the very businesses which need to be onboard for growth!. Also the talk of the £22 billion black hole constantly, didn’t exactly make business want to invest. Optimism is hugely important. Boris Johnson, for all of his many faults, talked the country up!
The only logical solution to end the doom loop is to cut the least productive areas of public spending, that would mean cutting social spending, specifically targeting welfare fraud and economic inactivity.
Is it worth making a video on the Bank of England's role in this, with their use of quantitative tensioning placing deliberate upward pressure to increase interest rates? This seems to be the cause of borrowing costs being so high vs other markets. Labour could stop this, by banning the sale of bonds (by the BoE), but they either don't seem to know that they can, or are not willing to do so...
No mention of quantitative tightening? The Bank of England is selling lots of UK bonds which is putting downward pressure on the price of UK bonds, hence the yield / interest rate is going up. The BoE could simply stop this process.
The Bank Of England is deliberately driving the UK economy into recession, quantitative tightening at this time is not necessary as we have a real net positive interest rate of around 3%, almost unprecedented in UK economic history, which is great for bankers. They are selling bonds back to the private sector that will be worth less than they bought them for, driving interest rates up. Bankers will be the beneficiaries, when the money is sucked back out of the private sector. The overall effect of this is enormous pressure on Rachel Reeves to impose austerity. Rachel Reeves has the power to stop this, but she is either unaware or just scared of banks and rich people. This is dire for the UK economy, we must stop the bankers.
In my opinion, there are a lot of things that are a major factor. 14 years of Tory negligence isn't going to fix itself, things need to get worse so they can get better. The economy was in so much sh!t that naturally it's not going to be an easy fix. Brexit has a lot to blame as well, not just the fact we left the EU but the whole issue with actually negotiating Brexit. The time, effort and people it took to get it "done", could've been spent on something else, something much more useful. Covid of course, that made the NHS issue even worse. With more sick people, there's less jobs. Covid had a massive impact on layoffs as well, a lot of companies restructured or laid off people, who now had to go unemployed or find another job quickly. Trump winning did not help either, all his tariff talks isn't making things easier and is scaring everyone because the future doesn't look bright. We've also got the Russia-Ukraine war and the sanctions, the gas issues, the money send to them for aid. We've got the Israel-Gaza war too. Not defending Labour but everything is going to sh!ts now and fixing all the Tory BS is going to take a long time.
We need to find innovative tax mechanisms, such as micro-taxing every transaction going through the city of London. The £trillions per month that go through could be taxed at 0.5% and you'd find that tax revenues would jump. Even 0.05% would make a difference over time. Add on closing tax loopholes for corporations, and the government would find its fiscal position is quite different
Rachel Reeves and Liz Truss may seem like political opposites, but in one important way, they are remarkably similar: neither was afraid to shake up the status quo in an effort to address the country's challenges. This is not intended as a criticism of either politician. Both demonstrated boldness in their respective approaches-Liz Truss pursued aggressive tax cuts to stimulate the economy, while Rachel Reeves proposed substantial tax increases to fund large-scale government spending. In both cases, their plans unsettled the markets, revealing a broader issue: the UK, accustomed to long-term economic stability, now struggles to implement radical solutions without triggering a market backlash. This isn't about praising or condemning either Truss or Reeves; it's about highlighting a systemic problem. The current model is no longer sufficient, yet any attempt to change it is met with significant resistance from markets that have become conditioned to stability. In this way, the two politicians are strikingly similar: both sought to disrupt a failing system, only to find themselves punished by forces resistant to change.
You can't undo 14 years of economic mismanagement in 6 months. No one can despite the braying from the Tories and their media. And sticking to proven broken fiscal rules isn't going to help.
Employ staff in the U.K. or Germany, supposedly 1st world countries, get no results and lose money. Germany is still deluded that it's competing in a turn of the century world, the U.K. is still deluded that it's competing in a mid twentieth century world.
Markets have been overly optimistic recently, it's normal for fluctuations to the downside regardless of who's in power. Rishi saw this coming which is why he called an early election, sneaky.
Reading the comments, it looks like the Brits are as upset as the Americans. We are all mad as hell at the economic situation and debt, but no political party seems to know how, or is willing to fix it. Maybe Milei in Argentina could teach a seminar.
It's a global phenomenon. Incumbent governments everywhere left and right wing are being blamed for the global economy problem. Politically this is not a good time to be in government.
Britain needs a Milei level shake-up to fix their economy. Someone needs to be willing to make tough decisions to fix their long term structural issues. And they need a public like the Argentinian one that is willing to suffer through short term hardship to repair their broken systems. Hopefully the British public recognises those needs quicker than their Argentinian counterparts did and don't end up enduring a hundred years of economic turmoil because they were too afraid of change
Any government would have a better peripheral vision on the economy than the general public do and aught to know better how to manage the economy. Makes me wonder why we're so bad at it?
You can't even compare Reeves to Truss, sure Truss was borrowing huge amounts of money but that was to attempt to stimulate in growth, all Reeves is doing is taxing and borrowing to spend on net zero woo and massive pay rises for the public sector, neither of which generate any wealth and just make the UK even less attractive to investment. We need to open up oil and gas exploration, become a net exporter of energy again to try and pay down some of the insane levels of debt we have which now costs well over £100bn a year just for interest payments. Then cancel net zero which is a totally pointless, virtue signalling, indulgence that is dragging down our economy and destroying what little industry we still have left.
I fail to see how any economy can grow when you can't afford to turn your heaters on, council tax ROBS the money you could have spent in the economy and Brits with professional jobs, skills, money, education and training leave the UK at the fast rates of notches they are doing, approx 500,000 per year. The pound sinking is more to do with the USD is the mothership of currency direction, if American inflation, gas prices and bonds are going up, so will the dollar and there isn't much any currency paired to it can do about it. Energy prices need to go do by 40% and we need a good 30% knocked off our council tax bills. I'm sure mine will be set at £2000 this year.
What kind of democracy do we have in a world where it matters more what the markets think and want than the citizens! We're being strangled by financialization
London is doing just fine... Are you suggesting that there's more to the UK than just London and it's square mile piggy bank? Just freelance and sell your services! C'mon! Chop Chop! Get peddaling your zero hours bike for £3.50 an hour like everyone else!
Pa-leez! It's not even 6 months in and people have to know that it takes time to change the ships direction. And don't forget voters said they didn't mind paying more taxes as long as they were getting more in exchange.
Taxes need to go up. If we want nice things like working services, we have to pay for them. We're paying so much less than neighbours in Europe, for example; it's no wonder services are breaking down. And we have to get that damned debt down. How much of my hard-earned tax money is going into the pockets of rich pensioners and other debtors instead of paying for my services? A lot. I mean, less now than there was before Labour stopped paying rich old farts the winter fuel allowance (bravo!) but still too much.
So why hasn't BofE interest rates gone up like they did under Truss..? And slow building crises tend to have more explosive results than surprises yes..?
It's not as sudden, but we're going down the same road. The refusal to shrink the state, and shift our tax burden away from productivity, is crippling our future.
Obviously coming from a Marxist perspective, but the PLP is totally beholden to the strings of capital. They can't do anything to upset their donors, and half of them wouldn't do so even if they could (Kendall, Reeves, Streeting etc) so they are stuck blaming the Tories and simultaneously doing nothing direct to actually make things better for people on the ground, unless your income relies on freezing pensioners and processed asylum seekers. Hilariously this is leaving them in the position where they are making things worse for both traditional labour voters and the FT readers. Unless there's a leadership challenge you can almost guarantee Labour won't last another term.
Energy pricing needs to be fixed. It would probably reduce inflation. Right now energy is priced such that if a single kW is generated by gas, all electricity in that time period will be priced as though it was generated by gas, which is ridiculous given that wind, solar and nuclear are all cheaper to produce.
Open market pricing to ensure supply. If the other sources can only supply 90% of the power demand of the grid, the 10% needed to be supplied by gas needs to be supplied at gas prices, load shedding (regional blackouts) will be needed, or grid failure will occur. If the nuclear isn't covered by a base load contract, which I understood British nuclear plants were, they would have to be paid a demand based spot market price to generate the required power at that time. Being variable, wind and solar power generation usually compete on the spot market. They are competing against gas and sell for the same amount as gas when gas is needed. To meet the need and maximize return as private companies, the price rises to match the highest priced power generated. Either non profit driven trusts/corporations run and control ALL power generation, or you need spot pricing to compensate private businesses for supplying and shutting down generation as needed.
They're a disaster, I think this year is going to be a disaster, that massive tax rise on business is going to be catastrophic. They're shrinking the private sector that pays the bills.
Our country is doomed. We need to be honest - WE CANNOT AFFORD TRIPLE LOCK nor the level of NHS services. Labour wasted their good will on meaningless winter fuel allowance for millionaires. Didnt go anywhere near far enough. At least have the honesty to tell young people we wont get a state pension.
Reeves need to phase in a land value tax to replace business rates to lower the dead weight loss and incentivise building. She was an early proponent of LVT in labour and by focusing on business rates would cover the majority of the benefits of LVT.
"Might be entering a period of economic stagnation"!!! GDP in Britain has been flat for 17 years!!!!
You'd have thought with 14 years to think about it labour might have had a plan.
@@dww6you'd thought that after giving the Tories 14 years, you would give Labour a bit longer than six months before blaming them for everything
You're getting confused with Germany
Quick, we need 10,000,000 more immigrants
The bottom line is there’s no realistic solution and nobody on either side, no matter how loud they shout, has one that’s practical within the confines of our financial establishment.
If this timid Labour government is “spooking” the markets, then we are truly fucked.
That means no party can actually enact the changes this country needs - not the Greens, not Reform, not Corbyn, not Labour, not the Tories… if anytime spending increases (or economic changes are made to break from the status quo) and as a result the financial markets get “spooked” and begin to crash, then it seems we are just forever doomed to austerity.
And that’s not doomerism, that is just the reality of the fiscal rules we are apparently bound to in modern Britain. Even if Corbyn’s Labour or the Green Party won a majority and were able to enact just a fraction of their massive spending plans that this country needs, they’d “spook the markets” and crash the economy, on a similar level to Liz Truss, and then this would harm normal people as the rich “investors” lose “confidence” in the UK economy - obviously the toxic UK media would also pounce on this and essentially end the government in the end.
Same for if Reform or the Tories get a chance, it’ll either be the exact same as what Liz Truss did and they’ll also “spook the markets” or, as mentioned above, more austerity which ultimately ends in a dead economy anyways.
The fiscal rules need to be broken - but it takes a party with balls to do that, for the media to be on side, and for the British people to put up with higher mortgages etc for a bit to see it through (unfortunately because of rich “investors” losing “confidence” in the UK economy, the average joe would have to suffer first) - all of which are things that I don’t see happening anytime soon.
There wasn't anything timid about a massive tax hike... it was stupid but not definitely not timid.
The trouble is the Wet Tories from Cameron to Sunak, enacted New Labour policies: high tax, high spend, high borrowing. For all the talk of "austerity" it didn't actually, really happen. They sanctioned a few on the brew but that was it. If the Tories had slashed spending and tax, i.e. Thatcherite, then Labour could have come in on a tax and spend basis claiming the Tories had starved the country. But they did the opposite. So there is no leeway for significant tax rise or significant borrowing rise. What neither of them will do, can do, is make the state more efficient. There is immense bureaucracy and waste, but nobody knows how to tackle it. When we had quills and 1/4 of the globe to manage we also had 1/10th of the current civil servants. As the country has shrunk, as information technology and paperless offices have made things more efficient, our civil service has gone up by a full factor. That is to say a full decimal point. It isn't sustainable, and looking at the current parties, not fixable either.
@@kierannewell6253 absolute bothsides-ism drivel.
The country has been afloat for 700 years without going under like some banana republic or on the 7th of whatever republic of France we're up to now.
Given the choice between parties at least wanting to try and follow the democratically decided principals of this country and not being great at it Vs a group of A) opportunistic toffs or B) Crazies there is definitely an **objective** choice to be made.
When people call for the country to be saved they picture a utopia and for it to have been built yesterday. It actually takes decades, multiple successive governments and strong partizan policies.
There are certain parties that aren't even offering that, yet you say they're all the same.
🫠
Yeah this feels right to me. So what do we as voters do?
@@AvocadoAfficionado no I agree, I’m not saying there’s not a choice or a better of evils or anything like that - my point is, no party or ideology can enact any sort of meaningful ECONOMIC change within the confines of these fiscal rules we follow where a small % of rich investors want to maintain the status quo and will gladly crash the economy if anyone threatens there “happy days” with meaningful change.
So no, it’s not bothsideism - it’s a realistic problem that any side will have to contend with.
Change IS possible if we break the chain but it will be painful - that’s it.
The british economy is a shit show, and a couple months under Keir Starmer is not changing that fact because this has been created over decades, since Thatcher. What are people expecting of the new government, and how can labour expect to change anything without being able to fundamentally change the rules!
Thatcher left the economy in very good shape. Major, himself economically to the left of Blair, mismanaged it and Soros pounced on it. Blair was was bad but in different ways. The Tories continued the Barite revolution, NOT the Thatcherite one.
@@darthkek1953 Many of the current problems have their roots in the damaging legacy of the Blair years. The Tories' biggest failing was either not attempting to fix them or doing a remarkably poor job of it.
@@Nerdy4Life Bots, bots everywhere.
Thatcher selling off every asset the country had and making you buy/rent it back to the benefit of some offshore owner is why you're poor.
Thinking Soros had anything to do with it is hilarious conspiracy level crazy
@@darthkek1953thatcher destroyed the country, she sold everything off and began this stupid Americanisation of our society. We used to own all public services and utilities etc etc etc. now we own nothing, it’s embarrassing.
They think 6 months of labour will some how fix decades of tory chaos
At this point I just want off from this wild ride 💀
I think we're all tired of living in interesting time
Labour is trying to fix the country be patient
if the default response to literally anything happening is to "vote them out", we will never be off this wild ride
I want Nigel Farage to just lead this wild ride now.
@@Deathstrider We are in a wild ride because 14 years of right wing sabotaging the UK and you want another right wing to lead UK again… typical Reformer
Also Liz Truss criticising Rachel Reeves for her handling of the economy is a bit like Timothy McVeigh criticising the Unabomber for causing loss of life 😂
It’s a battle to the bottom between them
@@SDDT25 'Do you want your incompetent overlords to wear red ties or blue?'
Yes but the other way round, Unabomber criticising McVeigh. Reeves has gone BEYOND Truss's peak failure, and there seems to be no stopping her.
@@joh2434green
the exact same being said about labour voters criticising liz truss
You'd have to be hopelessly naive to think either the Tories or Labour have any answers. Our system is broken.
Thats why less government is better, the less politicians have a say, the better our lives will be less taxes and more jobs too
@@reheyesd8666 true
@@reheyesd8666 in order to do that we must first privatize everything: roads, school, health care, railroads, the army, everything, because our taxes are used to maintain those things. If companies own everything, the goverment doesn't need to collect taxes. The companies can maintain those things
and both had/have massive majorities. if a single party with a majority can't fix it then what hope is there
@@reheyesd8666 So privatize more? Conservatives have been doing that for decades, how is that going? This was kind of the whole point of Liz Truss.
How is Liz Truss even still a thing?
Money
Prime ministers pension
Economic boogeyman
People desperately clinging to anyone who isn't a uniparty bureaucrat.
Being the shortest-serving PM is quite an achievement and will remain so until someone beats her speedrun.
Last thing anyone needs is to hear from Liz ''Iceberg lettuce'' Truss.
Truss' budget was the polar opposite of Reeves and would have led to growth. Alas, the media persuaded the public it was awful and now we have Labour again and more financial pain. The Bank of England admitted it was mostly to blame for the market problems in May 24.
I watch your videos with great pleasure. Your videos are a real treat for the eyes.
0:19 it would appear 2020 was quite the dragged out year 🤣
That’s what the lockdowns did to people lmao
We got 3 years of 2020 😮💨 I don't think anyone disagrees
Who’d have thought that reheated Blairism wouldn’t have solved things? 🙃
This is more Toryism, cuts and austerity
@Phyt5 Exactly, if only there was someone who’d had a better idea with a name like Jez 🤔
@@joh2434 😂
@Phyt5 There isn't much practical difference between Blair and the Tories other than branding.
If you think this is Blairism you are clueless. Blair actually ran a surplus in his first term and presided over the most prosperous economic period in UK history
I hope not. She was a complete mess
Honestly I've watched several of her podcasts and my opinion on her completely changed. If you go beyond headlines and news coverage some politicians are very different to how they're represented. There's more to the story than "she fucked up". Really shady shit.
as are labour
Truss' budget was the polar opposite of Reeves and would have led to growth. Alas, the media persuaded the public it was awful and now we have Labour again and more financial pain. The Bank of England admitted it was mostly to blame for the market problems in May 24.
The UK isn't a primary resource producer, not in any significant degree. Sure, there's the fisheries and North Sea oil, but agriculture, forestry, fishing, mining... They're all less than 2% of the UK's total economic output. The UK manufacturing sector, meanwhile, is close to 10% of the UK's economic output, with consumables (food, beverages, tobacco) at the top of the list, followed by motor vehicles, machinery, etc. The UK has a lot of skilled labour in that regard, and it's that skilled workforce that is basically the UK's one ticket to economic relevance. The Union is not a banana republic that can get by on basic commodity exports and resource extraction, it has to actually produce high quality workmanship products.
If you want the UK economy to grow, the first thing to do would be reversing Brexit and getting the UK back into the common market, so that its products are more competitive.
If you want the UK economy to grow, the second thing to do would be trying to identify economic sectors which the UK is well-equipped to service due to an history of expertise, like specialist aircraft part manufacture. Create targeted investment aimed at communities that have undergone historic decay due to the decline of manufacturing, especially in the North, and offer companies public-private partnerships that guarantee the government a share of the profits in exchange for covering a large section of the costs of opening a new manufacturing facility. Likewise, create training programs for jobs at those facilities at local universities and cover the tuition for them (maybe prioritize applicants from council estates).
If you want the UK economy to grow, the third thing to do would be to build as much new council housing as possible. Get rid of the Thatcher era reforms and let councils (A) raise their own taxes and (B) build a larger council housing supply. This will bring down rents, which will bring down the cost of land, which will make it easier to build and develop, which will reduce UK infrastructure costs. It'll give people more money to spend in their local economy, make it easier for them to get on the property ladder, and reduce speculator investment in property, freeing up money for use in the actual economy.
Alas, I doubt Keir Starmer is reading a comment section. But if you're in the UK, write to your local MP and tell them this is what you want to see and get your friends and family to do the same.
The irony of Liz Truss accusing Labour of nearly crashing the economy is hard to miss lol
If anyone isn’t qualified to talk about the economy, it’s Lettuce Liz
exactly the same irony of labour and their supporters attacking liz truss
Truss' budget was the polar opposite of Reeves and would have led to growth. Alas, the media persuaded the public it was awful and now we have Labour again and more financial pain. The Bank of England admitted it was mostly to blame for the market problems in May 24.
@@floriandebontdelbarre2700 truss was right
The economy under Labour is worse than under Truss
The difference is that the establishment are not trying to undermine Labour
"Liz Truss style crisis". Please read the facts. The Bank of England admitted in May 24 that it was largely to blame and hence Truss's lawyers have now sent a letter to Starmer asking he desist for perpetuating what he knows to be false. This channel is doing the same. The Truss was the polar opposite of Reeves and, while the markets had a little shake, we would not be in the problems we are today if the media, including this channel, both understood the economics and told the truth.
Take a look at the pound AND the euro Vs the dollar. This isn't just a Labour problem, it's a world wide political instability problem.
It's completely normal for state liabilities to lower in value when the perceived financial situation of the state worsens. All of this was very easy to anticipate after the last budget. When you take measures that increase spending (short and long term) so dramatically over revenue increases. And you increase your revenue by damaging the growth prospects of your economy, then you get yourself in a vicious cycle of stagnation and resistant inflation (due to fiscal deficit -> injecting currency) plus you keep higher interest rates (less private investment). The more the state spends, the less the private sector can invest. It is honestly quite a simple thing, and really going for growth would be quite simple as well. But the more time passes, the less I think this government knows how to do anything properly....
The worst thing labour could do is run about in panic, as stated in the video this is mostly a combination of international factors and investor confidence.
With the chaos of Trump, instability of France and likely instability of Germany having a set and steady plan and not budging is the best move.
....said the Captain of the Titanic.
Alot of this is the bank of england selling off gilts. The bank of Englands sell off has been quite significant.
Yeah this feels like a glaring omission from the video.
Of all the universes to live in, we live in the clown world one.
Labour is not. Gilt yields are rising globally and is set to fall again. Liz Truss criticising labour for the economic crisis when Lettuce crashed the economy 😂
Truss' budget was the polar opposite of Reeves and would have led to growth. Alas, the media persuaded the public it was awful and now we have Labour again and more financial pain. The Bank of England admitted it was mostly to blame for the market problems in May 24.
Just to briefly answer the video question, no.
Something I find incredible is that people will forget *14 years* of economic mismanagement, austerity, honestly terrible foreign policy and public neglect.
All to harass the government *the public voted for* that hasn't even had half a year of their five year term.
What did people want from them? for Labour to wave a magic wand and everything be fixed in an instant?
I heard someone honestly say the public hasnt been this angry with government since the poll-tax which has to be the most insane thing I've ever heard.
The right wing are amplifying this like crazy to try and convince people with little knowledge of economics that this is a extinction level event and we need another election after just 6 months after years of "NO REFERENDUMZ, NO-RE-DO, WILL OF THE PEEPOLE"
Yes, markets move. No this isn't GFE 2.0 or even in the same league as the "minibudget". Having supposedly centerist outlets covering the story in this way is insane.
They got less than 30% of the vote. They are harrassing the countryside, that's about all they're doing. People are correct not to expect anything good come from this.
Nigel Farage could have fixed it all in a week. Reform are so amazing I touch myself 😂
It's not news. People vote poorly for the best part of 20 years, then expect not to suffer from the long term consequences of their own choices and for someone to come down and fix it all overnight scoff free.
Terrible foreign policy?
This government is literally giving away the BIOT 🇮🇴
And Labour always manage the economy worse than tories
Labour under Jeremy Corbyn is worse than Labour under Keir Starmer!
Governments can manage their fiscal policies through three primary methods: curtailing public expenditure, issuing debt, and engaging in monetary expansion . Press (C) for cuts; (B) for borrow; or (P) for print.
You forgot the zeroth option. Press (T) to tax.
@@matthewparker9276, and costs get passed consumers and companies stop hiring people? Great! This is exactly what we need!
This assumes state has entirely passive role in economy. State can also:
- redistribute taxed money with wages it pays
- engage in public-private projects to enable growth on private sector
- invest in public structures and utilities that facilitate the economy
- subsidise industries, utilities, wages, or similar to maintain the economic state or to facilitate growth.
Wages the state pays act similarly to wages private sector pays, by enabling consumption and injecting liquidity to the local economy those employees take part in. The production state engages in might not collect a profit, but it can still generate value: if for example the education of graduated students makes their labour more valuable, it can (and generally does) outweight the work it took to educate them.
Those are just some ways the state takes active role in the national economy. State also is responsible for facilitating ALL exports and imports, by mutual agreements with other states or economic zones.
Here is the kicker: we don’t actually measure government finances in absolute terms. We measure them against the economy they facilitate. Government debt and new liquidity are absolutely crucial parts of monetary circulation, so the goal isn’t to get rid of them completely.
The economy needs government bonds as safe investment to balance risk, while printing no new money while the economy grows and produces more and more stuff would lead to absolutely brutal deflation.
Yes and right now she is in a pork market in Beijing, probably
Austerity after 2010 failed to bring down the debt to gdp ratio because
......
It wasn't austere.
We were spending more than raised in tax
Public sector was greater share of gdp every single year post 2010 to today than was in any year from 97-07. So not austere.
When youtubers try to understand economics, The markets aren't responding to recent Labour policies but they are responding to long term downward trends bought about by Tory austerity.
6 months into Starmer’s term, dogged at every turn by scandal and failure, yet still fortunately everything is still the Tories’ fault. Will his luck hold out or will some point in the next 4 and a half years see this excuse start to lose potency?
And that's changing sometime soon is it?
Right, and Lizz Truss's economic crash was only responding to long term downward trends brought about by Blairism 🙄
No party has the balls to sort any of the issues out. They benefit from the current shit system.
Betteridge's law: Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no.
If governments all over the world are all borrowing more money than ever then where does all that money come from and who profits from all of this?
They are borrowing it from millionaires and billionaires. This is the giant con most haven't trigged onto. The ultra wealthy have transferred their tax liability into government loans whereby they now get paid interest on the money they give over, which is still classified as being theirs.
All of this can be fixed very very easily by just taxing the wealthy at the level everybody else is being taxed at, something progressives have been telling people for years now. But no, most are happy to continue with this weird economic system of socialism for the ultra rich and rugged bootstraps vulture capitalism for everybody else.
Banks, investment firms, pension funds, and private investors, for the most part. You could buy gilts yourself, if you really wanted to (although that's not financial advice lol)
The Super Rich who own the institutions that lend to governments. Who are the same institutions who own and are buying up all the land and property with the idea to essentially rent everything out at far higher costs than they would cost before being bought by them. The money is basically being leeched out of the system. By the super rich.
@@anticlockwisepropeller7379also international organisations too like the IMF.
The profit is in investment, if borrowing increases or fixes rather hole in the economy you can get greater profit in the future.
No, what is happening in the bond market is in line with other bond markets. That was not the case with Truss.
Only half true just because the market is increasing doesn’t mean Uks cost are still far higher than for example germanys currently and it’s naive to suggest reeves didn’t massively contribute as she was warned her that budget would impact the borrowing markets
If something is the "highest its been since X", it would imply that it was higher at time X than it is now.
The UK was dead once they left the EU and didn't establish any real trade deals with other nations. Things just get more expensive when trade is more expensive.
Plus the world as a whole is stagnant at the moment. I think we are close to a global recession.
It's called sweeping your problems underneath the rug for too long.
Labour is dealing with the effects of economic sanctions that the Tories inflicted on us via Brexit.
Coping off the scale , it’s wild how you can’t see that a significant amount of this was self inflicted by the budget
True, but they're scared to state that brexit was a terrible idea and that we'll not make money.
If they had the ⚽️⚽️⚽️ then they would actively say brexit helped damage us and that the only way to get back to strength is by going back into the eu.
@@SDDT25 It hasn’t even been half a year yet check the date on those graphs and it’s pretty obvious it’s just the lingering effects of the previous and global instability.
@@SDDT25 I'm not defending the budget. But it doesn't change the fact that I stated.
labour isnt dealing with anything, red tory.
I've heard a couple of economists say recently, that a lot of this is down to the bank of England going through a process of 'quantitative tightening'. They're basically selling more bonds into the market. They could simply slow down the rate they're flooding the market with bonds to alleviate the rise in costs.
Starmer is in selfdestructive mode taking UK with him 😮😮😢
There is a correlation between a TLDR having a clickbaity title question and the answer to said title question is a solid no. Also the new 2025 intro sucks. Other than that the content inside the video is solid as ever.
As Harry Enfield once said in his program, women, know your limits.
I bet Starmer thinks the bond markets are far right as well.
There’s a reason why the bond vigilantes are out - despite rising bond yields globally, in the UK specifically, it speaks to growing concerns regarding government's borrow/spend agenda and fiscal prudence, but also growth momentum fading fast with little confidence in that being corrected near term.
At this point a good chunk of the problems in the UK are due to a man named Andrew Bailey.
The smoking gun is also the BoE, and the role of active QT over the past two years. Selling truckloads of QE gilts into an already oversupplied gilt market. IMF has pointed out how the BoE QT announcements have been far more destabilizing for gilt markets than other central banks
Edit: 30 year gilts haven’t touched 5.4% since 1998, not 2008.
Liz Truss should've lost her right to free expression after her term
Trouble is that when in opposition she talked the talk on growth, which the market liked. When in power they were unprepared and settled strikes with generous pay settlements, and her budget was disappointing for the very businesses which need to be onboard for growth!. Also the talk of the £22 billion black hole constantly, didn’t exactly make business want to invest. Optimism is hugely important. Boris Johnson, for all of his many faults, talked the country up!
The only logical solution to end the doom loop is to cut the least productive areas of public spending, that would mean cutting social spending, specifically targeting welfare fraud and economic inactivity.
Is it worth making a video on the Bank of England's role in this, with their use of quantitative tensioning placing deliberate upward pressure to increase interest rates?
This seems to be the cause of borrowing costs being so high vs other markets.
Labour could stop this, by banning the sale of bonds (by the BoE), but they either don't seem to know that they can, or are not willing to do so...
No mention of quantitative tightening? The Bank of England is selling lots of UK bonds which is putting downward pressure on the price of UK bonds, hence the yield / interest rate is going up. The BoE could simply stop this process.
Pictures of post-Soviet building sites (@ 2:52) do not fit well with talk about UK politics. Also, they really do stick out...
The Bank Of England is deliberately driving the UK economy into recession, quantitative tightening at this time is not necessary as we have a real net positive interest rate of around 3%, almost unprecedented in UK economic history, which is great for bankers. They are selling bonds back to the private sector that will be worth less than they bought them for, driving interest rates up. Bankers will be the beneficiaries, when the money is sucked back out of the private sector. The overall effect of this is enormous pressure on Rachel Reeves to impose austerity. Rachel Reeves has the power to stop this, but she is either unaware or just scared of banks and rich people. This is dire for the UK economy, we must stop the bankers.
If they don’t talk about Brexit, they can’t fix shit. End of
Been waiting for your video on the subject
If every country is borrowing they are borrowing from who??
In my opinion, there are a lot of things that are a major factor. 14 years of Tory negligence isn't going to fix itself, things need to get worse so they can get better. The economy was in so much sh!t that naturally it's not going to be an easy fix. Brexit has a lot to blame as well, not just the fact we left the EU but the whole issue with actually negotiating Brexit. The time, effort and people it took to get it "done", could've been spent on something else, something much more useful. Covid of course, that made the NHS issue even worse. With more sick people, there's less jobs. Covid had a massive impact on layoffs as well, a lot of companies restructured or laid off people, who now had to go unemployed or find another job quickly. Trump winning did not help either, all his tariff talks isn't making things easier and is scaring everyone because the future doesn't look bright. We've also got the Russia-Ukraine war and the sanctions, the gas issues, the money send to them for aid. We've got the Israel-Gaza war too. Not defending Labour but everything is going to sh!ts now and fixing all the Tory BS is going to take a long time.
You just listed the past 30 news headlines, that's not very insightful.
and labour before the torys, but you dont want to acknowledge that.
@@kostyatszyu and tories before the labour, but you don't want to mention that
Trust me all she has to do is threaten to sack the governor of the Bank of England if they don’t halt selling uk government bonds!
We need to find innovative tax mechanisms, such as micro-taxing every transaction going through the city of London. The £trillions per month that go through could be taxed at 0.5% and you'd find that tax revenues would jump. Even 0.05% would make a difference over time.
Add on closing tax loopholes for corporations, and the government would find its fiscal position is quite different
Rachel Reeves and Liz Truss may seem like political opposites, but in one important way, they are remarkably similar: neither was afraid to shake up the status quo in an effort to address the country's challenges. This is not intended as a criticism of either politician. Both demonstrated boldness in their respective approaches-Liz Truss pursued aggressive tax cuts to stimulate the economy, while Rachel Reeves proposed substantial tax increases to fund large-scale government spending. In both cases, their plans unsettled the markets, revealing a broader issue: the UK, accustomed to long-term economic stability, now struggles to implement radical solutions without triggering a market backlash.
This isn't about praising or condemning either Truss or Reeves; it's about highlighting a systemic problem. The current model is no longer sufficient, yet any attempt to change it is met with significant resistance from markets that have become conditioned to stability. In this way, the two politicians are strikingly similar: both sought to disrupt a failing system, only to find themselves punished by forces resistant to change.
Better change the title or Liz will send her lawyers after you ;)
You can't undo 14 years of economic mismanagement in 6 months. No one can despite the braying from the Tories and their media. And sticking to proven broken fiscal rules isn't going to help.
They only had to convince markets that they know what they are doing and have an idea how to bring economy on track in mid to long term.
Thanks
I listened to an interview with Liz Truss and one thing is clear. She wasn’t the problem, the UK is a failed state.
The 1st to 3rd world any % speed run continues unabated
Employ 3rd world staff, get 3rd world results as output.
Fairly obvious that one!
Employ staff in the U.K. or Germany, supposedly 1st world countries, get no results and lose money. Germany is still deluded that it's competing in a turn of the century world, the U.K. is still deluded that it's competing in a mid twentieth century world.
Brexit, inflation, low productivity, Uk tax policies, crumbling infrastructure, aging population
Markets have been overly optimistic recently, it's normal for fluctuations to the downside regardless of who's in power. Rishi saw this coming which is why he called an early election, sneaky.
Why do we not just up taxes
Rishi Sunak knew about that but he had no solutions of fixing it, so he called the election early.
Reading the comments, it looks like the Brits are as upset as the Americans. We are all mad as hell at the economic situation and debt, but no political party seems to know how, or is willing to fix it. Maybe Milei in Argentina could teach a seminar.
It's a global phenomenon. Incumbent governments everywhere left and right wing are being blamed for the global economy problem. Politically this is not a good time to be in government.
They have a policy option which they are stupid for not pursuing namely raising the income tax on everyone but the poorest.
Britain needs a Milei level shake-up to fix their economy. Someone needs to be willing to make tough decisions to fix their long term structural issues. And they need a public like the Argentinian one that is willing to suffer through short term hardship to repair their broken systems. Hopefully the British public recognises those needs quicker than their Argentinian counterparts did and don't end up enduring a hundred years of economic turmoil because they were too afraid of change
Any government would have a better peripheral vision on the economy than the general public do and aught to know better how to manage the economy. Makes me wonder why we're so bad at it?
Careful now, you might hurt Truss' feelings. At this point she's going to have to sue everybody. ;-)
""Harassed"" i think you mean rightfully criticised for his incompetence
The markets believe that the Labour leadership have no economic sense.
I 100% agree with them.
You can't even compare Reeves to Truss, sure Truss was borrowing huge amounts of money but that was to attempt to stimulate in growth, all Reeves is doing is taxing and borrowing to spend on net zero woo and massive pay rises for the public sector, neither of which generate any wealth and just make the UK even less attractive to investment. We need to open up oil and gas exploration, become a net exporter of energy again to try and pay down some of the insane levels of debt we have which now costs well over £100bn a year just for interest payments. Then cancel net zero which is a totally pointless, virtue signalling, indulgence that is dragging down our economy and destroying what little industry we still have left.
I swear that Labour is looking to lose in 2029. Maybe sooner.
You have completely omitted Brexit, which is probably the most important single drag drag on the UK economy.
I wonder will she be reshuffled
I fail to see how any economy can grow when you can't afford to turn your heaters on, council tax ROBS the money you could have spent in the economy and Brits with professional jobs, skills, money, education and training leave the UK at the fast rates of notches they are doing, approx 500,000 per year. The pound sinking is more to do with the USD is the mothership of currency direction, if American inflation, gas prices and bonds are going up, so will the dollar and there isn't much any currency paired to it can do about it. Energy prices need to go do by 40% and we need a good 30% knocked off our council tax bills. I'm sure mine will be set at £2000 this year.
What kind of democracy do we have in a world where it matters more what the markets think and want than the citizens! We're being strangled by financialization
London is doing just fine... Are you suggesting that there's more to the UK than just London and it's square mile piggy bank?
Just freelance and sell your services! C'mon! Chop Chop! Get peddaling your zero hours bike for £3.50 an hour like everyone else!
It's still Jeremy Corbyn's plan to destroy them anyway.
Pa-leez! It's not even 6 months in and people have to know that it takes time to change the ships direction. And don't forget voters said they didn't mind paying more taxes as long as they were getting more in exchange.
No, the same thing is happening in Europe and the USA
The last round of austerity hasn't been undone yet, and Labour is planning more cuts.
Taxes need to go up. If we want nice things like working services, we have to pay for them. We're paying so much less than neighbours in Europe, for example; it's no wonder services are breaking down.
And we have to get that damned debt down. How much of my hard-earned tax money is going into the pockets of rich pensioners and other debtors instead of paying for my services? A lot. I mean, less now than there was before Labour stopped paying rich old farts the winter fuel allowance (bravo!) but still too much.
Careful or Truss might sue you for defamation
Nothing to do with her awful budget then
Why is this not being uploaded onto nebula
So why hasn't BofE interest rates gone up like they did under Truss..? And slow building crises tend to have more explosive results than surprises yes..?
It's not as sudden, but we're going down the same road.
The refusal to shrink the state, and shift our tax burden away from productivity, is crippling our future.
And ppl rlly thought Labour were going to be that different from the tories
Obviously coming from a Marxist perspective, but the PLP is totally beholden to the strings of capital. They can't do anything to upset their donors, and half of them wouldn't do so even if they could (Kendall, Reeves, Streeting etc) so they are stuck blaming the Tories and simultaneously doing nothing direct to actually make things better for people on the ground, unless your income relies on freezing pensioners and processed asylum seekers.
Hilariously this is leaving them in the position where they are making things worse for both traditional labour voters and the FT readers. Unless there's a leadership challenge you can almost guarantee Labour won't last another term.
Energy pricing needs to be fixed. It would probably reduce inflation.
Right now energy is priced such that if a single kW is generated by gas, all electricity in that time period will be priced as though it was generated by gas, which is ridiculous given that wind, solar and nuclear are all cheaper to produce.
Open market pricing to ensure supply. If the other sources can only supply 90% of the power demand of the grid, the 10% needed to be supplied by gas needs to be supplied at gas prices, load shedding (regional blackouts) will be needed, or grid failure will occur. If the nuclear isn't covered by a base load contract, which I understood British nuclear plants were, they would have to be paid a demand based spot market price to generate the required power at that time. Being variable, wind and solar power generation usually compete on the spot market. They are competing against gas and sell for the same amount as gas when gas is needed. To meet the need and maximize return as private companies, the price rises to match the highest priced power generated. Either non profit driven trusts/corporations run and control ALL power generation, or you need spot pricing to compensate private businesses for supplying and shutting down generation as needed.
Insufficient return on private investment, no private investment in power generation, and no privately run let alone built generation.
They're a disaster, I think this year is going to be a disaster, that massive tax rise on business is going to be catastrophic.
They're shrinking the private sector that pays the bills.
Our country is doomed. We need to be honest - WE CANNOT AFFORD TRIPLE LOCK nor the level of NHS services. Labour wasted their good will on meaningless winter fuel allowance for millionaires. Didnt go anywhere near far enough.
At least have the honesty to tell young people we wont get a state pension.
The UK is broken. I don't know anyone who got more than 2 days off for Christmas. How long did MP's get?
worse! government borrowing costs are as high as they were during the last labour government more than 14 years ago!
During the financial crises
You mean when American poor financial regulation fucked the world?
Is TLDR intro having a Liz Truss moment?
Hmm, I'm beginning to think that austerity light is almost as bad as austerity regular.
For a channel which is usually very insightful i find the graphs used quite misleading but using a much longer time horizon than is relavent!
Reeves need to phase in a land value tax to replace business rates to lower the dead weight loss and incentivise building. She was an early proponent of LVT in labour and by focusing on business rates would cover the majority of the benefits of LVT.
The cabbage lmaoo
First off start getting better stats from the OBR