REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

British Treasury Secretary has been sacked for trying to Sabotage the English Economy with Quasimodo, Voodoo, CommonCore Economics?

POSTED BY: JAYNEZTOWN
UPDATED: Saturday, October 22, 2022 21:46
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 1340
PAGE 1 of 1

Friday, October 14, 2022 1:10 PM

JAYNEZTOWN


Ghana Kwasi Economics won't fly?

British PM removes Kwarteng as finance minister amid row over economic plan
https://www.business-standard.com/article/international/british-pm-rem
oves-kwarteng-as-finance-minister-amid-row-over-economic-plan-122101401320_1.html

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 14, 2022 4:51 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


It was a stupid plan made by stupid people.

Truss was going to cut taxes (for the rich) and subsidize energy bills while at the same time cutting other essential services, like health care. At the same time, the BoE (a PRIVATE bank, like our so-called "Fed") was raising interest rates to curb inflation.

That would mean absolutely massive borrowing from the (private) BoE by the British government at elevated interest rates. Bonds issued by the British Treasury were going unsold bc ppl were expecting more interest inflation and even higher interest rates. So the BoE intervened by buying British bonds, but ended it's bind-biying program today. That was to force a change in the government's fiscal policies.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE someone poor - William Blake


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 14, 2022 4:55 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


BoJo was the first to go.

Kwartain is the second to walk the plank. Liz Truss may soon follow

Sanctions against Russia seem to be causing regime change in Britain.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE someone poor - William Blake


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, October 16, 2022 9:53 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
It was a stupid plan made by stupid people.

Truss was going to cut taxes (for the rich) and subsidize energy bills while at the same time cutting other essential services, like health care. At the same time, the BoE (a PRIVATE bank, like our so-called "Fed") was raising interest rates to curb inflation.

That would mean absolutely massive borrowing from the (private) BoE by the British government at elevated interest rates. Bonds issued by the British Treasury were going unsold bc ppl were expecting more interest inflation and even higher interest rates. So the BoE intervened by buying British bonds, but ended it's bind-biying program today. That was to force a change in the government's fiscal policies.

I have seen you post more than once about your apparent confusion about the British Economy - or maybe you know something I don't. Otherwise, you make me think sloppyseconds hacked your login - or maybe you are merely pretending to be as insipid as he, which makes me confused.

So, can you explain the critical difference(s) between the British Economy and the US, which preclude the lower tax rate from increasing Tax Revenue, like in America?



The article links seems to keep details and truth, facts obfuscated, indicating it is a Libtard rag.

From what I can decipher, there is a claim that the proposed, planned, and current Increase of Tax Rate on "the rich" from 19% to 25% will create a loss of L25 Billion in Tax Revenue. Although this correlation is likely true, it is rarely expressed this way by budget makers, or accountants.
Such a Tax change would throw the economy into reverse, and reduce Tax Revenue - but the Economy was able to hold off by the promise/pledge of newly elected PM Truss that there would be "no new taxes" - which is also what Bush41 promised in 1988.
Now it appears Truss has capitulated to the Libtards, just like Bush41 did in 1990 - which led to the mini-"recession" just in time for the 1992 Election.

So some claim that NOT raising the Tax Rate by almost 1/3 is a "Tax Cut" and instead of raising the Tax Revenue by 25 Billion, will further cut the Tax Revenue by 18 Billion.


And, apparently, the Primary Function of the Federal or National Government is "HEALTH CARE."


Little of this makes rational sense, so if you could explain what obstruction or mechanism in the British economic system prevents more Tax Revenue from a thriving Economy, and less Tax Revenue from a stagnant economy, that would be great.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 17, 2022 2:40 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


JSF, I can't explain a policy that makes no sense, all I can do is describe it.

The commentariat consistently confuse financialism with the economy. Britain's inflation problem is due to a shortfall in "goods" (in this case, energy). You can't fix a supply problem by screwing around with government spending/taxes (government fiscal policy) or by raising or lowering interest rates (banking sector monetary fixes).

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE someone poor - William Blake


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, October 20, 2022 8:00 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
JSF, I can't explain a policy that makes no sense, all I can do is describe it.

The commentariat consistently confuse financialism with the economy. Britain's inflation problem is due to a shortfall in "goods" (in this case, energy). You can't fix a supply problem by screwing around with government spending/taxes (government fiscal policy) or by raising or lowering interest rates (banking sector monetary fixes).

Alright, perhaps you do understand that the policy which makes no sense is raising the income tax rate from 19% to 25%, and the policy which did make sense was cancelling that plan, which was what the voters voted for.
Your prior posts did not clarify that, which made it seem like sloppysecondsbot had hacked your login.

Obviously, the jam they are in was caused by long term fiscal irresponsibility on the part of their government, and drastic steps needed to be taken to correct the problem, which was what their election campaign promised and was rewarded for with a victory.
But now, they have decided to just kick the can down the road, further making their mismanagement even worse. If they really continue this way, they may not be able to recover. Will the King need to step in and take back control of the country from the Unwashed Libtard Lemmings?

When I heard about Truss caving in to the Anti-austerity wimps, I wondered if England is suddenly ruled by modern Greeks?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, October 20, 2022 8:24 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Such a Tax change would throw the economy into reverse, and reduce Tax Revenue - but the Economy was able to hold off by the promise/pledge of newly elected PM Truss that there would be "no new taxes" - which is also what Bush41 promised in 1988.
Now it appears Truss has capitulated to the Libtards, just like Bush41 did in 1990 - which led to the mini-"recession" just in time for the 1992 Election.

Seems that Truss has quit as PM. Making that a much quicker cycle than Bush 41 doing the same capitulation from 1988, 1990, 1992.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 21, 2022 5:59 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
JSF, I can't explain a policy that makes no sense, all I can do is describe it.

The commentariat consistently confuse financialism with the economy. Britain's inflation problem is due to a shortfall in "goods" (in this case, energy). You can't fix a supply problem by screwing around with government spending/taxes (government fiscal policy) or by raising or lowering interest rates (banking sector monetary fixes).

Alright, perhaps you do understand that the policy which makes no sense is raising the income tax rate from 19% to 25%, and the policy which did make sense was cancelling that plan, which was what the voters voted for.
Your prior posts did not clarify that, which made it seem like sloppysecondsbot had hacked your login.

Obviously, the jam they are in was caused by long term fiscal irresponsibility on the part of their government, and drastic steps needed to be taken to correct the problem, which was what their election campaign promised and was rewarded for with a victory.
But now, they have decided to just kick the can down the road, further making their mismanagement even worse. If they really continue this way, they may not be able to recover. Will the King need to step in and take back control of the country from the Unwashed Libtard Lemmings?

When I heard about Truss caving in to the Anti-austerity wimps, I wondered if England is suddenly ruled by modern Greeks?

JSF, Britain is lacking a vital resource, in this case, oil and gas, in actual millions of cubic feet of gas or metric tonnes of oil. You can't solve that problem by lowering or raising taxes, or by raising or lowering interest rates or by buying, or not buying bonds.

But to put it into less political terms. consider a nation that suddenly short of water. It doesn't matter how robust their balance of trade is, or how positive their balance sheet or even how much gold they've stored. You can't drink gold or grow food with currency.

There are two parts to the inflation probem of "too much mone chasing too few goods". Sometimes the problem is "too much money" but sometimes the problem is "too few goods", and THAT can be measured in absolute terms, whether it's in tons or barrels or cubic meters or numbers of widgets. If it's not enough, it's not enough.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE someone poor - William Blake


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 21, 2022 7:29 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK


It's a shame. We seemed to have plenty to go around 2 years ago.

--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 21, 2022 1:16 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
It's a shame. We seemed to have plenty to go around 2 years ago.

--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus

We can thank the west's attempt at imploding Russia's economy by making it more difficult for them to sell to the west.

Previously, in other geopolitical snits, we sanctioned Iran and Venezuela, cutting ourselves off from other large sources of gas and/or oil. Considering geography, Venezuela would have been a natural trading partner.

Also, we pissed off the Saudis. Not that they could help us out much bc their production is, and has been for quite a while, at near maximum.

The USA is not energy independent. We had a surge in supply thanks to fracking. But most fracked well outputs decline to about half in five years unless they're constantly "stimulated", and because of that, fracked oil and gas is inevitably more expensive. Either we trade with nations that will provide oil more cheaply than we can produce it ourselves, or we learn to conserve.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE someone poor - William Blake


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 21, 2022 6:15 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Well... I'm doing my part. Rounding up by probably quite a bit, I'm responsible for no more than 100 gallons in a year, and that's including my lawnmower and leaf blower.

The only problem is everything else costs more because of the shipping costing more. I don't buy much of that either, but everyone needs food.

Fortunately for now I've been able to buy cheap and in bulk and haven't been too effected by it, but there honestly is not much else that can be cut out of my budget if things ever got serious and inflation doesn't at least level out. I still have a lot of beef, but in the last month I haven't seen anything close to what I'd paid for it the last time. Same with coffee. Rice and vegetables at least haven't spiked by me, and dairy has actually come down quite a bit from the peak a few months ago.

--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 21, 2022 8:13 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Well... I'm doing my part. Rounding up by probably quite a bit, I'm responsible for no more than 100 gallons in a year, and that's including my lawnmower and leaf blower.

The only problem is everything else costs more because of the shipping costing more. I don't buy much of that either, but everyone needs food.

Fortunately for now I've been able to buy cheap and in bulk and haven't been too effected by it, but there honestly is not much else that can be cut out of my budget if things ever got serious and inflation doesn't at least level out. I still have a lot of beef, but in the last month I haven't seen anything close to what I'd paid for it the last time. Same with coffee. Rice and vegetables at least haven't spiked by me, and dairy has actually come down quite a bit from the peak a few months ago.

--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus

you're obviously not the problem!

When our old car was ready to bite the dust we decided to get a Honda Fit. It's the perfect car for running errands. It has a continuously variable transmission (CVT) which keeps the engine in itsmost efficient rpm range. Along with a light weight and efficient engine it can get 25+mpg driving in the city and 45+mpg on the highway.

But Honda stopped selling them in the USA.

Why?

Low sales. Americans want big SUVs and pickup trucks, and American firms are willing to sell them bc they make more profit on them.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE someone poor - William Blake


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 21, 2022 9:42 PM

JONGSSTRAW


The wifey and I went to a diner in Aventura for breakfast the other day. We just had a "regular" breakfast with scrambled eggs, meat, toast, and coffee. The bill with tip came to $ 47.00. Does that seem right to you?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 21, 2022 10:25 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:

Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
The wifey and I went to a diner in Aventura for breakfast the other day. We just had a "regular" breakfast with scrambled eggs, meat, toast, and coffee. The bill with tip came to $ 47.00. Does that seem right to you?



It only sounds "right" to me because that's what prices around here are for eating out too. Not that I ever pay for it, but my buddy bought Chinese one night, and though it was a pretty heavy bag it was almost $50. A large pizza at the local (awesome) place my aunt and Grandma go to is over $45 now. It's damn near $6 for a freakin' Whopper if you don't have a coupon. These are all without tips.

It's insanity. I think the amount of money I'm saving by never eating out is actually growing, but that doesn't help take the sting out of the fact that even though I shop super frugally I'm starting to see that the only way I can get prices I used to pay is if I get a good coupon or sale on top of buying in bulk, so the "savings" are essentially gone. Some things like meat I can't even do that anymore. I've been holding off on re-stocking on that because I've got about 4 months in reserves. Kind of a gamble there, really. I could end up regretting that if prices actually go up more instead of comign back down by then.



--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 21, 2022 10:30 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Well... I'm doing my part. Rounding up by probably quite a bit, I'm responsible for no more than 100 gallons in a year, and that's including my lawnmower and leaf blower.

The only problem is everything else costs more because of the shipping costing more. I don't buy much of that either, but everyone needs food.

Fortunately for now I've been able to buy cheap and in bulk and haven't been too effected by it, but there honestly is not much else that can be cut out of my budget if things ever got serious and inflation doesn't at least level out. I still have a lot of beef, but in the last month I haven't seen anything close to what I'd paid for it the last time. Same with coffee. Rice and vegetables at least haven't spiked by me, and dairy has actually come down quite a bit from the peak a few months ago.

--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus

you're obviously not the problem!

When our old car was ready to bite the dust we decided to get a Honda Fit. It's the perfect car for running errands. It has a continuously variable transmission (CVT) which keeps the engine in itsmost efficient rpm range. Along with a light weight and efficient engine it can get 25+mpg driving in the city and 45+mpg on the highway.

But Honda stopped selling them in the USA.

Why?

Low sales. Americans want big SUVs and pickup trucks, and American firms are willing to sell them bc they make more profit on them.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE someone poor - William Blake




Yeah... It's stupid.

But I can't really judge too much there. I've regretted buying the Big house for a decade now when there was a perfectly small house with a small lawn I could have gotten for around the same price. Now I'm stuck with 4 bedrooms and 2 bathrooms to clean, a few years left of rehab, a lawn that takes 2 hours to mow and a lot of rooms that I never use that get heated and cooled for no good reason.


But for cars though, I wouldn't really want a small car unless everyone was already driving them too. I see those "Smart" cars on the road sometimes and I'd just feel like a bug waiting to be squashed while driving on the expressway in one of those. Not a chance.

--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, October 22, 2022 2:23 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Well... I'm doing my part. Rounding up by probably quite a bit, I'm responsible for no more than 100 gallons in a year, and that's including my lawnmower and leaf blower.

The only problem is everything else costs more because of the shipping costing more. I don't buy much of that either, but everyone needs food.

Fortunately for now I've been able to buy cheap and in bulk and haven't been too effected by it, but there honestly is not much else that can be cut out of my budget if things ever got serious and inflation doesn't at least level out. I still have a lot of beef, but in the last month I haven't seen anything close to what I'd paid for it the last time. Same with coffee. Rice and vegetables at least haven't spiked by me, and dairy has actually come down quite a bit from the peak a few months ago.

--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus

you're obviously not the problem!

When our old car was ready to bite the dust we decided to get a Honda Fit. It's the perfect car for running errands. It has a continuously variable transmission (CVT) which keeps the engine in itsmost efficient rpm range. Along with a light weight and efficient engine it can get 25+mpg driving in the city and 45+mpg on the highway.

But Honda stopped selling them in the USA.

Why?

Low sales. Americans want big SUVs and pickup trucks, and American firms are willing to sell them bc they make more profit on them.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE someone poor - William Blake




Yeah... It's stupid.

But I can't really judge too much there. I've regretted buying the Big house for a decade now when there was a perfectly small house with a small lawn I could have gotten for around the same price. Now I'm stuck with 4 bedrooms and 2 bathrooms to clean, a few years left of rehab, a lawn that takes 2 hours to mow and a lot of rooms that I never use that get heated and cooled for no good reason.


But for cars though, I wouldn't really want a small car unless everyone was already driving them too. I see those "Smart" cars on the road sometimes and I'd just feel like a bug waiting to be squashed while driving on the expressway in one of those. Not a chance.

--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus

Well, "back in the day" they built houses for bigger families. Maybe some day you'll sell your house to a nice family with 2.1 children and grandma, who can use all of that space.

But yanno, families have downsized a bit. The currently built homes should be about maybe 2000 sq ft with 3 bedrooms and 2 baths. So what's the excuse for the McMansions going up all over the place, with 2-story entryways that belong to a bank, not a family home?

The incentives (real estate speculation) are in the wrong direction, incentivizing people to overbuild.

In the meantime, you could think abut renting out a room. I know you would hate it bc you value your privacy ... who doesn't? ... and you've certainly had a stellar example of a rental gone bad, but it might be worth it.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE someone poor - William Blake


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, October 22, 2022 9:46 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Well, "back in the day" they built houses for bigger families. Maybe some day you'll sell your house to a nice family with 2.1 children and grandma, who can use all of that space.

But yanno, families have downsized a bit. The currently built homes should be about maybe 2000 sq ft with 3 bedrooms and 2 baths. So what's the excuse for the McMansions going up all over the place, with 2-story entryways that belong to a bank, not a family home?



Yeah. This being a tri-level house though it's not at all a McMansion. Mine is actually technically 3/4 the size of your 2,000 sq ft suggestion, but that's because the breezeway/porch isn't included since there is no heat out there and is taxed at a lower rate. But because of my porch and the shed on the end of it, my house looks absolutely huge from the street. The layout sucks, even for a tri-level which just isn't a good design IMO anyhow. My brother's tri-level has a much nicer layout than mine. Mine is full of rooms that are bigger than they need to be and rooms that suffer from that and are smaller than they should be. Particularly my bathrooms, which combined are the size of your typical single bathroom in a ranch house. And because of where the drain pipes are, it would be MAJOR renovations to get a decent sized bathroom in here.

Quote:

The incentives (real estate speculation) are in the wrong direction, incentivizing people to overbuild.


This is SO TRUE. Nobody wants to build small houses anymore because they can't make any money on them. So we keep building monster houses that cost a fortune to heat in the winter. I was just recently inside of one that was ALL entry way, with a ceiling that peaked at 20 feet easily. It's just stupid. And it's usually two old/retired people with no kids I see living in these things. Why on earth would they want to do that to themselves?

Quote:

In the meantime, you could think abut renting out a room. I know you would hate it bc you value your privacy ... who doesn't? ... and you've certainly had a stellar example of a rental gone bad, but it might be worth it.


My cousin was telling me that years ago. He'd totally be renting this out to at least 2 people. I dunno. Maybe someday if I get this place put together right I'll consider it. I'd never think about it with the renters laws in Illinois, but I think the landlord has more protections here in Indiana.

If my brother didn't have such a sweet setup at that place down south my dad got him into, I'd practically be able to just live off of what he pays for rent and utilities without ever tapping the bank for anything other than home improvement and new tools (Or man toys, as I like to call them. :Smile)

--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Kamala Harris for President
Fri, November 1, 2024 00:23 - 598 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Thu, October 31, 2024 23:47 - 4658 posts
Trump Presidency 2024 - predictions
Thu, October 31, 2024 22:56 - 16 posts
U.S. Senate Races 2024
Thu, October 31, 2024 20:49 - 9 posts
Electoral College, ReSteal 2024 Edition
Thu, October 31, 2024 20:47 - 35 posts
Are we witnessing President Biden's revenge tour?
Thu, October 31, 2024 20:44 - 7 posts
No Thread On Topic, More Than 17 Days After Hamas Terrorists Invade, Slaughter Innocent Israelis?
Thu, October 31, 2024 20:35 - 35 posts
Ghosts
Thu, October 31, 2024 20:30 - 72 posts
U.S. House Races 2024
Thu, October 31, 2024 20:30 - 5 posts
Election fraud.
Thu, October 31, 2024 20:28 - 35 posts
Will religion become extinct?
Thu, October 31, 2024 19:59 - 90 posts
Japanese Culture, S.Korea movies are now outselling American entertainment products
Thu, October 31, 2024 19:46 - 44 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL