[HN Gopher] UK households set for largest fall in living standar...
___________________________________________________________________
UK households set for largest fall in living standards in six
decades
Author : paulpauper
Score : 90 points
Date : 2022-11-24 16:59 UTC (6 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.ft.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.ft.com)
| [deleted]
| LatteLazy wrote:
| 2 general elections and a referendum all returns clear mandates
| for a poorer weaker more isolated country. People are finally
| getting what they voted for. Yey democracy.
| BoGoToTo wrote:
| Don't worry, the Tories will just cut taxes on the rich again and
| that will fix everything /s
| odiroot wrote:
| More probable is raising taxes on middle class.
| miohtama wrote:
| After the current term is over, it's unlikely Tories are going
| to wield political power for a while.
| samwillis wrote:
| I'm not so sure, there are more "shy" conservatives than
| people realise. Moving towards the centre will stabilise the
| party, and if they do loose the next election there is an
| inherent culling of the current crop of right wind MPs.
|
| The likely hood is that, if Labour win, they will be faced
| with such a mess that they will struggle to make the
| necessary improvements. The conservatives, will move towards
| the centre, and with the right leader could regain power
| after a single term out.
|
| The left is fragmented (party wise), the right is not. Labour
| will always have an uphill battle unless we have electoral
| reform.
| akmarinov wrote:
| Who's up next - Labour?
| sgt101 wrote:
| by default. But, if they don't screw things up they have a
| chance of being in power for 20 years... we will see.
| chinabot wrote:
| What a shit choice you have, even the monster-raving-loony-
| party couldnt have created the circus that exists at the
| moment.
| zx85wes wrote:
| Consider yourself lucky you're not across the sea in the
| Netherlands. Inflation is 14%+ and household purchasing power
| is below the level it was 20 years ago.
| ChuckNorris89 wrote:
| I mean that's like every other EU county at this point. Is
| there anything specific to the Netherlands I'm missing?
| zx85wes wrote:
| Inflation is 6% higher than the average* , and nominal
| wages are up <4% * https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/
| 2995521/15265521/2-1...
| ChuckNorris89 wrote:
| According to that, Hungary and the Baltic states are hit
| far worse than the Netherlands.
| Justsignedup wrote:
| Hey man, if people would stop buying their mocha lattes,
| internet, phones, computers, and netflix, they could save so
| much money that they could upgrade their carboard box in the
| park to a carboard box mansion! /s
| samwillis wrote:
| You've not gone far enough, they need to give up the Avocado
| on toast for any chance of that happing. /s
|
| In all seriousness though, I think the current generation of
| 20-30 yo are increasingly giving up on any plan to buy a
| house, ever. They are making the decision that even with
| sacrifices it's unattainable, and so they just want to enjoy
| themselves. And eat the avocado on toast.
| cloutchaser wrote:
| This is such a simplified viewpoint. The UK has never been able
| to collect more than 39%-40% of GDP in taxes. And that's what
| the level is at now. Already everyone is paying as much tax as
| in history. (and the "rich" pay a lot of that, remember you pay
| PS0 tax under PS15,000 income per year).
|
| You can try and tax more, but it's highly unlikely to work
| based on past experience. And in these cases, like with
| corporation tax, usually the government actually collects more
| tax revenue at 20% than at 30%. So again, I'd prefer factual
| taxation, not virtue signalling.
|
| What's the solution here to get more in taxes?
| Glawen wrote:
| Remember that everyone is paying VAT, so yes little income
| are also taxed
| Moissanite wrote:
| I feel like we need a progressive VAT, which differentiates
| necessities from luxuries. Probably too complex to
| implement though.
| ChuckNorris89 wrote:
| Many countries have progressive VAT. In my country food
| is half the VAT of consumer goods while medicine and
| books have zero VAT.
|
| It's definitely not that difficult to do.
| stu432 wrote:
| We do already, there's several VAT values, necessities
| are supposed to be VAT free for instance. Has some quirks
| in it, so you end up with the Jaffa Cake Vs Biscuit
| debacle - https://www.astonshaw.co.uk/news/jaffa-cake-
| tax/#:~:text=The....
| midasuni wrote:
| I pay hardly anything in vat other than a few luxuries.
|
| Food Rent Public transport
|
| No vat on those
|
| Electricity is only 5%
|
| A few quid a year on vat on toothpaste hardly makes a
| difference.
| Veliladon wrote:
| If only there was some form of large market close by that the
| UK could be a member of so that the UK could trade with them
| in a frictionless manner and expand the economies of both
| areas through trade. That would increase the GDP and hence
| the amount of money the government could have available to it
| through taxation.
|
| But I don't think there is anything like that around. I mean,
| if there was, why the hell wouldn't they be lining up to
| become a member of it? There's only upside there.
| cloutchaser wrote:
| Very nice, but the EU is probably going to decline in GDP
| more than the UK, and the euro could potentially collapse
| due to the Italy situation in the next few years.
|
| Thinking the UKs issues are because of brexit are about as
| simplistic as saying "tax the rich will solve all the
| worlds issues"
| jimnotgym wrote:
| >the EU is probably going to decline in GDP more than the
| UK
|
| Even if that does happen, it doesn't necessarily follow
| that the UK couldn't also have a higher GDP by trading
| with the EU
|
| >Thinking the UKs issues are because of brexit
|
| ... could make you the governor of the Bank of England
|
| https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/nov/16/brexit-
| and-...
| sgt101 wrote:
| It doesn't follow, but history post 2016 wasn't written
| in gold if the UK had stayed in. The north of England,
| the central belt of Scotland and the south of Wales were
| in a terrible state. Brexit has failed to help, but
| remaining almost certainly wouldn't have either. The
| biggest issue the UK has experienced since leaving is
| Covid-19. Remaining wouldn't have helped us in that
| contingency.
|
| The UK has blamed Europe for it's ills for 40 years.
| Remainers/rejoiners are still centered on this - we have
| to start to look to ourselves. Being in or out of Europe
| is not at issue; working to build a sustainable national
| economy and polity is.
| jimnotgym wrote:
| >south of Wales were in a terrible state.
|
| South of Wales benefitted greatly from EU funds. From
| renovating coal tips to employment schemes. I don't
| understand your point here, it was the EUs fault that the
| UK had run down regions... even though the EU gave them
| money????
|
| >The UK has blamed Europe for it's ills for 40 years.
| Remainers/rejoiners are still centered on this
|
| This makes no sense at all
|
| >we have to start to look to ourselves.
|
| Are you suggesting that we shouldn't have international
| trade?
| sgt101 wrote:
| If only. Of course, you mean the EU.
|
| But the UK has run a trade deficit of $60bn with the EU for
| the last 10 years or so. Leaving hasn't helped that, but
| staying wouldn't have either.
|
| Something has to change in the relationship - something
| deep and real. The fundamental is the competitive advantage
| that the Euro confers on the German economy. Brexit is a
| way it can change overtime, there won't be an advantage for
| the UK, just an emergent state that is sustainable. The UK
| will be poorer in the present - but may avoid a Greece
| style implosion.
|
| Truss showed that _may_ is important here.
| adrian_b wrote:
| I fail to see which advantage is conferred by the Euro to
| the German economy, at least in the relationship with UK.
|
| Unlike Germany, UK has always been free to establish any
| exchange rate they desired, between GBP and EUR. So only
| UK could have any advantages from the manipulation of the
| currencies.
|
| Within the countries that use EUR, it can be claimed that
| Germany has the advantage that the other countries cannot
| cheat and compensate other economic problems by playing
| with the exchange rate. In my opinion that is a good
| thing, because stealing money from the people by
| devaluating their assets through artificial exchange
| rates is not the right solution for solving international
| commerce imbalances.
| hnhg wrote:
| You should say high income earners rather than "the rich"
| here, to be perfectly accurate. The two are not always the
| same.
| Moissanite wrote:
| Very important for people to understand this. For high
| earners (100-200k), marginal tax rates can already pass
| 60%. That is an income which is locally considered very
| high but compared to our Atlantic cousins is somewhat more
| normal.
|
| I will be thousands of pounds worse off per year under the
| new tax plans, but I'm OK with that because I understand
| that it is necessary. However, we are rapidly approaching
| most people's tolerance limit in this regard; unless the
| next government does a very good job of tackling economic
| injustice it feels like people will just give up - at which
| point the only way is down.
|
| Now, what "give up" really looks like is key - I feel like
| widespread civil unrest is far closer than most people
| realize, but before that there will be a further decline in
| social cohesion. Right now it feels like this story is
| being masked by the Ukraine situation.
| midasuni wrote:
| Becaus of the "high income child tax" and student loan
| repayments marginal tax rates at just 50k hit 70%. They
| drop again at 60k, but it's tricky to justify working
| extra hard for a PS5k pay rise when you only keep PS2k of
| it.
|
| Doesn't help that you can't file jointly in the U.K.
| either.
| phphphphp wrote:
| If that's true, why isn't that the party line? Every tax-
| reductionist I've heard from talks to the moral crime of high
| taxation, and the necessity to cut reliance on the
| government. I have not heard (as a regular person outside of
| academic circles) any politician argue that reducing taxes
| will increase revenue. Given how trivial this concept is to
| validate (cut taxes and see revenue go up) why hasn't it been
| implemented?
|
| https://www.conservatives.com/our-plan/economy
| zpeti wrote:
| Honestly, because since Blair the conservatives have been
| playing politics in labour's court, and labour's language
| and labour's politics. There hasn't been a clear and good
| communicator in the conservative party since... I want to
| say Thatcher?
|
| The facts of this are true. When corp tax decreased from
| 28% to 20% tax take actually increased. But the
| conservatives seem unable to communicate this properly.
| It's sad to be honest. The "science" is there. But blaming
| the "Tories who want to reduce taxes on the rich and screw
| you" seems to be the talking point, not facts.
| woodruffw wrote:
| > This is such a simplified viewpoint. The UK has never been
| able to collect more than 39%-40% of GDP in taxes. And that's
| what the level is at now. Already everyone is paying as much
| tax as in history.
|
| This has a double meaning: (1) "everybody" meaning _the whole
| body_ , and (2) "everybody" meaning _each tax-paying
| individual_.
|
| The two are not the same: it can be true that the whole body
| of taxpayers is paying the same amount (proportionately) into
| the GDP as always, while more of that proportion comes from
| the lower and middle classes than it historically has.
| jimnotgym wrote:
| One solution is to tax wealth rather than income.
|
| That should be popular...
| akmarinov wrote:
| Nationalise some royal lands
| ChuckNorris89 wrote:
| What's stopping the UK government to seize UK land owned
| by the royal family?
|
| Or at least taxing them the same rates as the peasants
| instead of letting them freeload.
| jimnotgym wrote:
| I presume these are two unrelated points?
|
| Nothing stops the UK seizing crown lands. In fact it sort
| of does. This is where the sovereign grant comes from.
|
| Land however is not generally taxed in the UK so in that
| sense they do pay the same.
| stu432 wrote:
| Because they effectively pay 85% tax on the income
| already. Look up the Crown Estate. The UK government
| taking it over would result in it being sold off at
| bargain basement prices to fund a voter winning 5 min fix
| and there'd be nothing to show for it in 50 years.
| JonChesterfield wrote:
| Also known as "theft"
| olddustytrail wrote:
| No, also known as "tax". Original taxes were always on
| wealth rather than income. We should go back to that.
| Fatnino wrote:
| There was a tax measure on the ballot here in California
| and the argument against was "taxes are theft from people
| who probably have better use for that money"
|
| The measure passed easily.
| theironhammer wrote:
| thebruce87m wrote:
| What country in the UK has PS15k? I just looked at Scotland
| and England and they both have PS12,570 as the basic
| threshold.
| jwmcq wrote:
| >What's the solution here to get more in taxes?
|
| Easy - increase corporation tax. The main rate has been
| literally halved over the last 30 years.
| jimnotgym wrote:
| Tax Capital Gains at the same rate as income?
| midasuni wrote:
| Not to mention income from retirees. A pensioner on PS35k
| income pays far less in tax than a worker on PS35k
| income.
| JonChesterfield wrote:
| The thing with that is corporations can defer profits until
| the rate falls again, while in the mean time you encourage
| people to open new premises elsewhere. So the take is not
| remotely linear in the percentage.
| yason wrote:
| _What 's the solution here to get more in taxes?_
|
| The same as usually: increase the taxable base, not the tax
| percentage. Tax a larger base moderately than trying to out-
| tax the last dribbles of a dwindling, current economy.
|
| To do this, work politically to make it easy and lucrative to
| do business and increase overall wealth, and make it
| productive and worthwhile for individuals to get more by
| working more.
| rsj_hn wrote:
| This is 100% caused by the anti-Russian sanctions policy, yet not
| a single comment on this thread so far has even mentioned the
| sanctions and tried to engage in a reasoned debate about whether
| the economic costs paid by Europe (and especially the energy
| insecure nations within the EU) were worth whatever moral good
| boy points the sanctions buy us.
|
| Some have suggested the sanctions help Ukraine, but haven't
| articulated a plausible mechanism by which this happens. I can
| see how sending weapons to Ukraine helps their war effort. I can
| see how sending money to Ukraine helps their war effort. But I
| fail to see how Europe de-industrializing and being plunged into
| a low standard of living helps Ukraine. Weakening Europe doesn't
| seem to be a pro-Ukraine policy position. And it's hard to think
| of another geopolitical tool that has a near 100% failure rate
| yet which is everyone's favorite tool. It's Alice in wonderland.
|
| Meanwhile, the Russians are laughing, they have record trade
| surpluses and budget surpluses (in the middle of prosecuting a
| war) and their economy is growing again. They are not finding it
| hard to find buyers for their fertilizer, wheat, oil, gas, coal,
| etc. These are things that everyone needs, not just Europe. China
| and India are both backing Russia and massively ramping up trade
| with them. A massive trade deal with Iran is being signed. OPEC
| is backing them and increasing trade. Latin America is increasing
| trade. Africa is increasing trade, as are the central asian
| republics and southeast Asia. All of this should put an end to
| the idea that Russia needs to trade with Europe or that Europe
| matters a whole lot to Russia's future.
|
| But back in Europe, which is forced to pay premiums for Russian
| LNG laundered through China and Russian Oil laundered through
| India and Malaysia, there is complete silence on the foolishness
| of sanctions, as article after article comes out about UK
| standard of living declines and German de-industrialization, with
| no one discussing why energy costs so much more in Europe than in
| the rest of the world. Instead, people are talking about Brexit,
| corporate greed, etc -- all the usual talking points, without a
| single mention of what is causing this dramatic economic decline.
|
| Truly a bizarre state of public discourse.
| pydry wrote:
| It is amazing that in March the media was gleefully writing
| obituaries for the Russian economy.
|
| In the end when Putin told us our sanctions were stupid and
| would hurt ourselves more than Russia it turned out that the
| bluster was on our side.
| phlipski wrote:
| Do you have any sources showing how the Russian economy is
| growing?
| unity1001 wrote:
| https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/russian-economy-
| contr...
|
| https://www.economist.com/finance-and-
| economics/2022/08/23/w...
| rsj_hn wrote:
| Well what happened was that sanctions created a sharp, fast,
| contraction -- maybe 5% or so. Russia measures GDP year over
| year, so there are still declines. But the standard way of
| measuring GDP is continuously -- e.g. quarter over quarter,
| annualized. So according to more realtime data, the
| contraction lasted a couple of months and they are now in
| expansion, but it will probably be around 2Q 2023 before the
| year over year data turns positive.
|
| A reference is here, using Goldman-Sachs faster frequency
| data.
|
| https://www.economist.com/finance-and-
| economics/2022/10/11/a...
| timeon wrote:
| Especially since there are sources [0] stating the opposite.
|
| [0] https://www.ft.com/content/e4f0cb9b-695c-4cc3-92c8-f8371d
| e2a...
| timeon wrote:
| Is you username relevant here?
| zx85wes wrote:
| I expect more people will vote far right or far left as a
| consequence. I'm a moderate, but the centre parties that
| created this mess won't get my vote again.
| nathanaldensr wrote:
| You're noticing the depth of the indoctrination and just how
| little people actually think for themselves. Even _thinking_
| about an unpopular explanation is enough to cause intense
| cognitive dissonance.
| drozycki wrote:
| > yet not a single comment on this thread so far
|
| There were only three top-level comments when you posted this.
| You could have opened this discussion calmly, but you came in
| running with resentment towards the community. Why did you
| choose to do that?
| mensetmanusman wrote:
| The ~100,000 Russian families who just had their son thrown
| into a meat grinder aren't laughing.
|
| War is hell.
|
| People have been warning for years that Russia would continue
| attacking neighboring countries every other year or so, since
| it has been going on for years.
|
| Can't blame the world for finally starting to fight back.
|
| If the UK government had war gamed this scenario, they would
| have realized many preparatory actions that could have been
| taken to protect their economy.
| rsj_hn wrote:
| I mean, if, by "fighting back", you mean destroying its own
| economy, then yes, _The West_ is "fighting back". But not
| the _world_ , as the vast majority of nations - 7 Billion
| people -- are not imposing any sanctions because they have
| more rational leadership than in the 1 Billion people that
| are destroying their own economy in the name of "fighting
| back".
|
| The main reason why the West is in rapid decline at the
| moment is because it is adopting policies based on their
| therapeutic value to the administrative class, rather than
| their effectiveness. That's a recipe for failure, and if you
| want to succeed rather than fail, then you need to choose
| your actions carefully and strategically rather than slamming
| your head against a granite wall because you think this means
| you are "fighting back".
| zpeti wrote:
| I just can't help but think there's some truth in the
| conspiracy theory I read on twitter from Kim Dotcom... this
| Ukraine war is an awfully convenient way for the US to
| completely decouple and destroy Europe and Russia. Which is a
| massive win for... the US. Who definitely didn't do much to
| PREVENT this war at any point.
|
| I don't think this was necessarily 100% intentional, but it
| definitely seems like an energy independent, moderately
| industrial, innovative USA is THE biggest beneficiary of this
| war on the relative scale.
| rich_sasha wrote:
| The war was and is caused by exactly one party, and that's
| Russia.
| theironhammer wrote:
| unity1001 wrote:
| > this Ukraine war is an awfully convenient way for the US to
| completely decouple and destroy Europe and Russia
|
| Its amazing how that needs to be said and how that is a
| conspiracy theory even as US foreign policy think tanks have
| been advocating for that and even laid out many published,
| well thought out plans that are being implemented to the
| letter now.
|
| https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RB10014.html
|
| That's CIA's PR arm. It published that in 2019. Every single
| policy that it outlined is being carried out now.
|
| The propensity of the Angloamerican public to ignore what is
| inconvenient and see what they like is amazing. The Brexit
| process and the Ukraine war has been literal sociology cases
| in which one could finally understand how the nonexistent
| Iraqi WMDs and the ensuing war was sold to the Angloamerican
| public.
|
| > I don't think this was necessarily 100% intentional
|
| Oh boy, it was 100% intentional.
|
| https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-03-09/european-.
| ..
|
| The Eu is removing itself as a competitor to the US as of
| this very moment. The UK had destroyed itself before that
| with Brexit.
| kypro wrote:
| I'll get downvoted for this, but this isn't true if you're one of
| the two protected classes in the UK: pensioners or welfare
| recipients. Both will see their income rise with inflation.
|
| If you're working then, sure, you're getting screwed as always
| because after just spending billions locking down the economy to
| saving boomers from Covid, this year we decided to spend billions
| bailing out boomers pensions, paying for boomers energy bills and
| ensuring that boomers can see their pensions rise inline with
| inflation.
|
| Everyone in my family is either a pensioner or on benefits and
| they are having a great time in their PS500k government provided
| homes, driving their government provided cars, heating their
| homes with money the government gave them.
|
| And I'm all for pensions and welfare, but the wealth divide
| between those on benefits and those who work is insane in this
| country. If we were all doing fine then whatever, but the fact
| all my friends who work full-time can't afford anything and
| consider themselves lucky if they can afford to rent a 2 bed flat
| while those who don't work are living in PS500k houses drives me
| up the wall.
|
| If we we were all doing well then whatever, but I'm sat here
| freezing and wondering how I'm going to pay for my mortgage
| that's going through the roof because of all the money we've
| borrowed for the boomers.
| midasuni wrote:
| While there an element of truth in that workers are subsidising
| pensioners - mainly though paying their entire economic output
| in rent, your rant about welfare is somewhat off.
|
| The lack of housing is the single biggest drain on U.K.
| economic output, as when demand outstrips supply rents rise to
| a point that all economic activity is captured by land owners.
| The only way around that is a land value tax, but that would
| really hit the wealthy.
| LatteLazy wrote:
| Agreed.
| switch007 wrote:
| Wow you really got triggered that benefits rose with inflation
| eh
|
| > one of the two protected classes in the UK: pensioners or
| welfare recipients.
|
| What an absurd and false statement which justifies disregarding
| the rest of your comment
| midasuni wrote:
| Workers have been told we can't have pay rises matching
| inflation because that would fuel inflation.
|
| But pensioners get a 10% pay rise.
| fasteo wrote:
| Upvoted. Same in Spain
| mjhay wrote:
| It's truly all the fault of the powerful and influential
| welfare scroungers, just like the Telegraph says. Thank you for
| being so brave to speak your truth.
| mensetmanusman wrote:
| What do you mean by saying PS500k government homes? Is this a
| policy or a consequence of a housing shortage?
| midasuni wrote:
| Housing shortage. Driven mainly by a wealthy class of nimby
| home owners.
| tannhaeuser wrote:
| German government just started UBI basically; in other words,
| they're buying their votes. Not getting your boomer hate,
| though.
| timeon wrote:
| Yes hate is not appropriate but still there seems to be
| issue: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZuXzvjBYW8A
| Spivak wrote:
| If you're part of party A and worried that party B is getting
| votes from people you previously counted among your
| supporters due to UBI the only rational thing to do is also
| support UBI. Because even if you're a fiscal conservative
| surely having UBI and an otherwise tight fiscal policy is
| better than UBI and a loose one, right?
|
| It's crazy that politics seems completely unable to adapt to
| the will of the people changing over time.
|
| It think about this a lot with the Republican party in the
| US. If the Republicans did a 180 on a few key social issues
| they would be able to win easily with a margin that Democrats
| couldn't easily close the gap on.
| unity1001 wrote:
| > boomers pensions
|
| Those boomers spend that money. The money enters the economy.
| It creates the economic activity needed for the ones who you
| call 'those who work' to be able to do business and make money.
|
| Pumping money to boomers, the poor, disabled and the
| underprivileged is the easiest way to stimulate an economy. Not
| giving more money to the rich.
|
| > all the money we've borrowed for the boomers
|
| Those boomers have worked for 40+ years and PAID that money
| that they are taking now into the treasury. Its THEIR money.
| For decades, your government used that money in its own affairs
| to fund many things. Those boomers literally facilitated those
| governments' policies and the economy.
|
| It needs to be said again - its THEIR money. You are not giving
| them something out of goodwill as a charity. You are paying
| back the money that they LOANED to the society.
|
| Its debt. They are your debtors. You have to pay back your
| debtors.
| midasuni wrote:
| The boomers are the rich. They are the wealthiest generation
| ever in the U.K, the generation who typically retired with
| final salary pensions and a couple of BTLs, and they lay far
| less tax on their income than workers
| pydry wrote:
| >the two protected classes in the UK: pensioners or welfare
| recipients.
|
| Landowners and shareholders are the two protected classes.
|
| Pensioners are more protected but they are likely to lose
| triple lock at some point. Dividend taxes will NEVER be as high
| as income tax.
| buserror wrote:
| brexit. Everyone in the media try to ignore the elephant in the
| room. But, brexit. I know several companies who are winding down,
| because they can't export. Just too much trouble and money. It is
| everywhere, and nobody talks about it.
|
| brexit.
| thoughtstheseus wrote:
| Poor trade relations is a big drag on the UK economy. If you
| can't plan you can't invest.
|
| I'm hoping the UK joins the United States. We've already
| started to merge our military industrial base and have a long,
| shared history. Maybe they would receive preference for US
| LNG/coal shipments too as a result.
| piva00 wrote:
| > I'm hoping the UK joins the United States. We've already
| started to merge our military industrial base and have a
| long, shared history. Maybe they would receive preference for
| US LNG/coal shipments too as a result.
|
| This is unrealistic bordering absurd, you just came out of
| Brexit sold under the pretense of increased freedom and
| sovereignty. The UK didn't even like the special deal it had
| with the EU, unique concessions that no other country in the
| Union would get because the Union acknowledged that the UK
| was worthy enough to be in with those rather than out without
| them.
|
| It'd be ludicrous to believe that coming from this sentiment
| the population would agree in joining the US, losing most of
| its sovereignty to become a 51st State under control of the
| USA Federal Government, like extremely ludicrous. The cherry
| on top would be the humiliation to the UK's nationalists in
| becoming a vassal of a former colony, I don't see this having
| any chance whatsoever to happen, not now, not in the next 50
| years.
|
| I gotta ask, what fosters this hope of yours? I haven't seen
| a Brit so deluded in wishful thinking as this take, it's a
| bit baffling, sorry to say.
| JauntTrooper wrote:
| I assumed he meant like a free trade union, not political
| integration.
| thedrbrian wrote:
| don't forget the 700 billion on lockdowns and the rona.
| pydry wrote:
| Whatever the opposite of an elephant in the room is, that's
| Brexit. It was talked about _to death_. It was the cause and
| reason for everything.
|
| It was talked up by as either a glorious thing or a
| monumentally cataclysmic event when it hit in 2020 and in the
| end it was... mildly negative. It was skilfully played up as a
| wedge issue for 5 years.
|
| The elephant in this room isnt Brexit it is war.
|
| (and idiotic energy policy)
| guilhas wrote:
| Sure, I and many others were just paid for almost a year not to
| work. And now electric bills are double due to the war. But of
| course it will all be Brexit for many years to come
| tannhaeuser wrote:
| Actually, I can't stand articles drawing connections to Brexit
| everywhere, both continental and Brit, when they're clearly
| told-ya-so pieces coming from long held opinions.
| zrtqaf wrote:
| cloutchaser wrote:
| I don't really understand the perspective your are saying. The
| UK was basically the ONLY country that helped Ukraine straight
| away when the war started, it was the UK that dragged the US
| along, and Germany is still dragging its feet on arms supplies.
| And I'm not saying that as someone who thinks Ukraine should be
| supported at all costs, but what the UK did was admirable.
|
| If you mean Brexit, yes, there is some blame here, but it's one
| of the MANY issues the UK has been kicking down the road.
|
| The UK has almost no manufacturing, its all financial services
| and service industries. There is less and less local energy
| production, and the cost is way more than the EU. Yet all
| attempts at starting fracking is failing.
|
| On top of that 2008 then covid bought massive money printing.
|
| At some point, you just can't fight physics. I'm sorry. There
| is so much wrong with the UK economy now it's insane. You can't
| print money to make cheap energy, while interest rates rise on
| 100%+ debt, while everyone moves into US dollars for the safe
| haven. Something has to give.
|
| The UK either makes some tough choices now, on par with what
| Thatcher did, which will be extremely painful, or this slow
| decline will continue.
| MichaelCollins wrote:
| > _I don 't really understand the perspective your are
| saying._
|
| He thinks that helping Ukraine defend themselves against a
| foreign invasion qualifies as "warmongering", obviously he's
| a Russia-aligned troll. Don't waste too much time trying to
| unravel his thought processes.
| hlpq10 wrote:
| Whatever you say, Lord Palmerston.
| MichaelCollins wrote:
| Made a new account, huh?
| whatever1 wrote:
| It's ok at least they took their country back from the bad EU /s
| Moissanite wrote:
| Brexit means Brexit;
|
| Let us make the best of it!
|
| What a crock of shit.
| rich_sasha wrote:
| And get to keep the fish they would otherwise have to export!
| thoughtstheseus wrote:
| Government spending without a credible increase in government
| revenue creates inflation. It's astounding how many people don't
| see this. You can't print money/credit and expect to maintain
| purchasing power. The UK needs to supply low cost energy, not
| print money to buy energy.
| coob wrote:
| You can do one of those overnight, the other not so much.
|
| Also: spending without revenue creates a deficit, not
| necessarily inflation.
| sokoloff wrote:
| It does tend to create inflationary pressures via an increase
| in the borrowing cost of government (often expressed as the
| government bond rate), which in turn makes the entire cost of
| many other forms of borrowing more expensive, which in turn
| changes the expectation of what a dollar or Euro or pound is
| worth today as compared to what it will be worth in a year's
| time.
| cloutchaser wrote:
| He didn't say overnight. Who said that?
|
| And Sunak just cancelled all fracking that Truss wanted to
| start. So the UK has basically decided to NOT have any form
| of cheap energy.
|
| You reap what you sow.
| midasuni wrote:
| Sunak is keeping the van on wind power. Every agreed that
| fracking wouldn't help with the energy crisis.
| thoughtstheseus wrote:
| Markets price in updated expectations immediately. Maybe
| they don't price it right but they do price it.
| kypro wrote:
| Would be funny if you're an American. The UK has almost half
| the debt-to-GDP of the US thanks to years of austerity.
|
| > The UK needs to supply low cost energy, not print money to
| buy energy.
|
| Sure, but you can't do that over night and not temporarily
| backstopping consumers until that supply comes online risks
| bankrupting businesses and putting even more strain on the
| economy. So long as it's temporary it's probably the best thing
| we can realistically do.
| bryanlarsen wrote:
| It's not the debt that matters but the change in debt, aka
| the deficit / surplus. If the debt stays constant, so does
| the money supply. The absolute level of the debt doesn't
| matter with regards to inflation, it's the change in the
| levels of debt that matter.
|
| A larger debt means more interest payments which makes a
| significant deficit more likely, but it's that deficit, aka
| change in money supply, that affects inflation not the
| absolute size of the debt.
| cloutchaser wrote:
| 85% vs 125%? What are you on about? That's a long way from
| half. And the USD is the reserve currency of the world, the
| moment interest rates started to rise everyone moved into
| USD.
|
| The US is also energy almost independent. The UK has
| increasing energy prices, and refuses to do anything about
| it.
| rsj_hn wrote:
| Moreover, low GDP growth and high interest rates will cause
| the UK to catch right up :)
| sremani wrote:
| No country especially the ones with decelerating economies
| should compare themselves with USA. The rules apply to US
| differently. I m not going to list them, Brits should realize
| this is not 1921.
| MichaelCollins wrote:
| > _Brits should realize this is not 1921._
|
| Heh, well stated. The sun set on the British empire a long
| time ago. Expectations need to be adjusted accordingly.
| berkut wrote:
| Yes, but the US has the world's effective (for the moment
| anyway) reserve currency: the UK's not in that position.
| toxicFork wrote:
| https://archive.is/pf8oy
| unnouinceput wrote:
| Quote: "... and higher unemployment are battering household
| finances..."
|
| But but wasn't Brexit suppose to fix unemployment? Wasn't the
| entire idea that once the foreigners are no longer welcoming the
| rising market will start employ the local population and drive
| down unemployment? And yet, almost 3 years later (Jan 1st is
| around the corner) the unemployment is still rising. Who would've
| thought that isolating yourself is not actually a benefit for a
| capitalist market.
|
| I mean history is a forgettable science after all, none thought
| that past lessons of isolation of Japan or China from centuries
| ago would still be applicable to today's situation /s
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-11-24 23:02 UTC)