Liz Truss and the Conservative Party.

[Gloster]

George Monbiot is a freelance writer and journalist. He is not a Grauniad staffer, although he does write a regular column and occasionally other articles for it. This is a quite normal arrangement and is not one of the hidden staffers, where journalists, particularly columnists, are technically freelance for tax reasons, but are close to being staffers.

 

[Busaholic]

Yes, George Monbiot writes columns for the Guardian. But he's almost certainly not an employee of theirs and is free to produce content for other organisations, who will have different standards on what they'll include. What he writes for other outlets isn't necessarily endorsed by the Guardian.

I wouldn't have thought he'd been employed by anyone since he left the BBC's Natural History Unit, certainly not in this country anyway. Most writers who only contribute occasional columns for newspapers and magazines are not employed by them, nor indeed are many whose contributions appear weekly. There won't be a huge amount of money paid for the articles anyway, except in 'special cases' like a certain Johnson,B.

 

[Pete_uk]

Looks like they are going to screw pensioners over by removing the triple lock.

 

[jfollows]

Looks like they are going to screw pensioners over by removing the triple lock.

We'll all be pensioners some day, any lower rise in state pension next year will continue to feed through as lower pensions in the future. (I'm a "pensioner" in the sense that I live off a pension and don't work today, but it's 6 years before I qualify for the state pension.)

 

[reddragon]

So if he's a Guardian columnist, and the story you originally claimed - that Liz Truss 'was groomed by dark-money lobby groups' and is (implied: deliberately) 'trashing this country on their behalf' is remotely true or reliable, how come the Guardian didn't publish that story? (Note that the Guardian comment you have now linked to makes no reference to any claim like that).

It appeared on fringe media early today, picked up by George.

Any media worth its salt would fact check & do due diligence and maybe even its own research before publishing something this incendiary.

I guess we shall find out true or not in the next few days or if the papers will run with it or not! Depends on their 'sponsors' more than anything else.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I guess we shall find out true or not in the next few days or if the papers will run with it or not!

We'll see. But I think you can be pretty certain the mainstream press will not run with it. The whole thing totally smells of silly-conspiracy-theory. Stories like that invariably turn out not to be true (at least in the UK). To my mind, Truss appears to be (like quite few politicians in the Government) too ideological, incompetent, has made huge mistakes, and subjectively doesn't seem up to the job, but you can be very certain she's not in a wild conspiracy to ruin the UK in order to benefit tobacco companies or something.

Depends on their 'sponsors' more than anything else.

Wow, you really can't leave the silly conspiracy theories alone, can you! So when in a few days time it turns out that no professional media outlet has published this silliness, are you going to pop up again and declare that the only reason they didn't publish it is because they're in hoc to tobacco companies or some other fairy tale?

 

[brad465]

Err no. The link you posted is to a Tweet of a video that claims to be by Double Down News. I don't see any reference to having been published by the Guardian on it. The reliability of Double Down News can perhaps be judged by that their home page currently contains a story headlined 'Jeremy Corbyn DESTROYS The Establishment'

In that case why doesn't anyone in being accused of the dodgy funding behaviour sue for libel? If there's no evidence they stand a good chance of winning.

I do hate clicking headlines like "x DESTROYS y" though, regardless of whether I agree with the content or not, especially as I think it's counterproductive. This is another example where critical thinking education being mainstream is essential.

 

[Sm5]

I could agree with VAT if it was a tax on luxuries such as £1000 handbags and yachts, however the fact that it is levied on such a vast range of goods and services means that it is just a drag on lower household incomes and the economy.

If you put it on income tax instead, at least the burden could be proportioned according to ability to pay.

Putting it on income tax doesnt change the imbalance for the likes of Amazon, ebay, starbucks etc… the profit goes out, the cost comes in and the balance sheet looks red, when its really rosy pink…. Meanwhile the shop next door goes under due to heavy taxation.

when something is sold in this country to someone in this country, it should be a level playing field for tax paid for those goods. The government is letting legitimate tax walk out the door when it comes to corporate taxation.

The added benefit of lower corporation tax is the same benefit the Irish had, in attracting EU companies to its shores… but were out now, so dont have to follow those rules.

Lower corporation tax, higher VAT will bring much more than another % on income tax. Thats why there isnt a stealth tax on energy companies…they are trying to tempt them in here… some tax being better than no tax On a company that doesnt have the UK as its primary market place.

So if he's a Guardian columnist, and the story you originally claimed - that Liz Truss 'was groomed by dark-money lobby groups' and is (implied: deliberately) 'trashing this country on their behalf' is remotely true or reliable, how come the Guardian didn't publish that story? (Note that the Guardian comment you have now linked to makes no reference to any claim like that).

Theres always a story like this.

I made a bet with friend in May that there would be a crash before Halloween. Indeed in the history of my posts on here, back in July I said it would happen by October.

I’m not a dark art, mystic, psychic, no it all or a city trader.. I just walk the streets with my eyes open and watch whats going on.

People were locked down for two years, saved a fortune, came out to find the shelves werent fully stacked. They all thought to ‘ell with it ive earned it after the last two years and so prices went up. Now summer has passed, the holiday that cost a fortune is on the credit card and people start tightening.
Now with a war, inflation and high fuel its gone up faster.

Truss didnt need to do anything imo… everyone would have cut back anyway (we probably were in recession in September anyway).
Some kind of crash was inevitable. My guess was always housing, as interest rates have to follow inflation.

Truss did it in a Boris kind of way for us. If I believed in superstition i’d say it was deliberate stage show to avoid a mega crash. A 2008 style housing crash was entirely possible, with banks owning repo housing.

Now its going to be worse that it is, but maybe not as bad as it could have been.. instead theyve gone for a typically British split crash, half now, half next May… The housing market will probably not now crash, but a decline will set in for a few years. If I were superstitious i’d say it will be timed to encourage holidays at home, just as the kings coronation is timed to put London on Expedias no1 list next summer, but not for its own people… but i’m way to cynical, Britiain isnt all about money, is it, no of course not.

 

[yorksrob]

Putting it on income tax doesnt change the imbalance for the likes of Amazon, ebay, starbucks etc… the profit goes out, the cost comes in and the balance sheet looks red, when its really rosy pink…. Meanwhile the shop next door goes under due to heavy taxation.

when something is sold in this country to someone in this country, it should be a level playing field for tax paid for those goods. The government is letting legitimate tax walk out the door when it comes to corporate taxation.

The added benefit of lower corporation tax is the same benefit the Irish had, in attracting EU companies to its shores… but were out now, so dont have to follow those rules.

Lower corporation tax, higher VAT will bring much more than another % on income tax.



Theres always a story like this.

I made a bet with friend in May that there would be a crash before Halloween. Indeed in the history of my posts on here, back in July I said it would happen then.

I’m not a dark art, mystic, psychic, no it all or a city trader.. I just walk the streets with my eyes open and watch whats going on.

People were locked down for two years, saved a fortune, came out to find the shelves werent fully stacked. They all thought to ‘ell with it ive earned it after the last two years and so prices went up. Now summer has passed, the holiday that cost a fortune is on the credit card and people start tightening.
Now with a war, inflation and high fuel its gone up faster.

Truss didnt need to do anything imo… everyone would have cut back anyway (we probably were in recession in September anyway).
Some kind of crash was inevitable. My guess was always housing, as interest rates have to follow inflation.

Truss did it in a Boris kind of way for us. If I believed in superstition i’d say it was deliberate stage show to avoid a mega crash. A 2008 style housing crash was entirely possible, with banks owning repo housing.

Now its going to be worse that it is, but maybe not as bad as it could have been.. instead theyve gone for a typically British split crash, half now, half next May… The housing market will probably not now crash, but a decline will set in for a few years. If I were superstitious i’d say it will be timed to encourage holidays at home, just as the kings coronation is timed to put London on Expedias no1 list next summer… but i’m way to cynical, Britiain isnt all about money, is it ?

It may well do, but the only reason higher VAT will bring in more money is because it clobbers too many people with no option.

If they need to do something about offshore tax avoidance by multinationals, they should impose restorative rate on multinationals.

 

[Tetchytyke]

LikeLooks like they are going to screw pensioners over by removing the triple lock.

Rightly so. My wages aren't protected by a "triple lock", and my wages pay state pensions. The "triple lock" was always an imbecilic idea.

To my mind, Truss appears to be (like quite few politicians in the Government) too ideological, incompetent, has made huge mistakes, and subjectively doesn't seem up to the job

Like with any good conspiracy theory, there's normally a huge dollop of truth in amongst the fantasy.

The links between Russian oligarchs and the Conservative Party are worthy of further investigation, links between many of the far-right "think tanks" such as the Taxpayers Alliance and Russia are worthy of further investigation, links between the Brexit movement and Russia are worthy of further investigation. Jim Mellon's business history makes for fascinating reading.

It certainly suits all of the above that someone as singularly and doggedly ideological as Truss is in power. And so they provided the money to make sure she got into power. It's the same in the US with the likes of Peter Thiel and the Koch brothers funding all sorts of far right organisations and pressure groups.

It's far more mundane than a John le Carre novel, but the corrosive effect of toxic money shouldn't be quickly dismissed.

 

[nw1]

Can you cite something that Badenoch has said that justifies that interpretation of her beliefs. Or is it just something that you've made up?

I said "sounds like", rather than "is". This discusses the "anti-woke" thing, for example: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62176280

Would you support freedom for anyone living anywhere in the World - say, South Africa, Russia, Colombia, the USA, India, as well as every other country, to come to the UK right now without any restriction? And if you don't then are you truly a libertarian?

I appreciate in some cases there are concerns, such as those related to national security, drug smuggling, or terrorism. However I wasn't talking about that. I was specifically talking about freedom of movement within Europe, but I would extend that to other low-risk countries, including the USA for example. But my main point is not the rights and wrongs about freedom of movement (such arguments tend to get nowhere because I think most of us have quite entrenched beliefs about that), but rather the fact that a lot of these right-wingers label themselves as "libertarian" when they are clearly not as libertarian as all that.

I will admit no-one, including myself, is 100% libertarian. I guess an 100% libertarian would allow people who commit murders and other violent crimes to escape jail; I certainly don't believe that. But some of the so-called "libertarians" seem to be very much not.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

In that case why doesn't anyone in being accused of the dodgy funding behaviour sue for libel? If there's no evidence they stand a good chance of winning.

That's a fair question. But I would imagine that the answer is, Twitter is just so full of these kinds of made up stories, that most politicians would feel it's just not worth the hassle/expense of pursuing them. So it tends to be, only when something is particularly damaging or is propagated by an easily identifiable and very influential figure that you get to see legal action.

 

[Domh245]

Rightly so. My wages aren't protected by a "triple lock", and my wages pay state pensions. The "triple lock" was always an imbecilic idea.

Speaking as an "embittered youth", whilst the triple lock certainly isn't the best deal for working age people, we shouldn't forget that:
a) State Pensions are (on their own) pretty meagre and had lagged behind what they should have been for a long period of time
b) Arguing about the money spent on pensions detracts from other (more important!?) points about the other money sinks and funding shortfalls that have been allowed to flourish in the previous 12 years +

Really, we should be looking towards means testing the state pension (and ultimately transitioning it towards a national UBI type scheme), but cutting the inflation measure out of the 3 for this year does make a lot of sense given that, at least this winter, the main inflationary driver is domestic energy which is being capped to varying extents, and raising the pension to cover that element is I think more than fair. Longer term reforms (and the consequences of higher energy bills for firms being passed through) will need a bit more care & attention to get right - not that the tories will do either!

 

[Tetchytyke]

Lower corporation tax, higher VAT will bring much more than another % on income tax

VAT is a staggeringly regressive tax, which primarily targets the poor, and takes a far larger proportion of a poor person's income than it does a rich person's income.

Lower corporation tax is always a race to the bottom, there's always another country with a lower rate. Here in the IOM corporation tax is 0%, so we have a great line in brass plaques and "corporate services providers", with few businesses having a genuine link to the island. Lower corporation tax doesn't attract genuine business; the likes of PayPal may have chosen to be nominally based in Ireland, but they don't do much for the Irish economy.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Oct 2022 ==

Really, we should be looking towards means testing the state pension

No. I pay National Insurance, which is a percentage income tax, to qualify for the state pension. It shouldn't be means-tested.

The really poor get Pension Credit, which is means-tested (and is about double the rate of equivalent working age benefits). It's worth noting that the Tories changed the rules for this, so a mixed age couple (one above pension age, one below) are treated as working age, and get fewer benefits.

 

[nw1]

VAT is a staggeringly regressive tax, which primarily targets the poor, and takes a far larger proportion of a poor person's income than it does a rich person's income.

Indeed. Plus higher VAT will put people off making non-essential purchases, further harming the economy.

 

[Tetchytyke]

What does "prevent other people from going about their lives" mean?
Prevent people using certain streets in London for a few hours during one day because there's a particularly big march?

It means "protest quietly, over there in the corner, where nobody has to listen to you."

Like a lot of politicians- both from the left and the right- Badenoch believes in free speech just as long as she agrees with what you're saying.

The "anti-woke" lot are a funny bunch. When "comedian" Jerry Sadowitz gets his gig cancelled because he got his penis out on stage before using horribly racist words about Rishi Sunak it was "cancel culture gone mad", but throw a bit of soup around and hanging's too good for them. And I always chortle about multi-millionaire Joanne Rowling moaning about "cancel culture" when she's only got a voice because she wrote some hackneyed children's books 20 years ago.

The Stop Oil lot are annoying little children- I'd have left the two idiots who glued themselves to a wall there for a day or five to let them think about their life choices- but we have to defend their right to be silly little children. After all, the Suffragettes did lots of high-profile stunts that annoyed the powers that be.

 

[Typhoon]

*If* you believe the polls done by ConservativeHome, Mordaunt was ahead at first

https://conservativehome.com/2022/0...och-by-under-ten-votes-in-over-eight-hundred/

but a few days later Badenoch was well ahead

https://conservativehome.com/2022/0...are-bunched-together-second-third-and-fourth/

and easily would have won the 'final two' against any of the others

https://conservativehome.com/2022/0...-sunak-third-mordaunt-fourth-tugendhat-fifth/

But two days later she was eliminated by the MPs (and Mordaunt immediately afterwards).


As far as I could tell, the members liked Mordaunt because she seemed impressive and fairly unknown, but quickly went off her when they learnt more about her, apparently in particular because (a) she seemed to hold rather muddled views on 'culture war' issues, and (b) she wrote a fairly vacuous book, with a foreword written by Bill Gates and enthusiastically reviewed by Tony Blair, where she espoused many platitudes but very few ideas, and the ideas she did espouse didn't seem very good (eg. she seemed very in favour of on-line censorship).



Yes, but the problem for someone like myself is working out which is which - ie. which will be less bad, I don't expect either of them to be 'good' in this respect.

For example, we know Jeremy Hunt's approach over the last few years was go for zero-Covid, that the Chinese approach was/is great, take people out of their homes and put them into quarantine camps. That's probably worse than Starmer would have done, and I find the idea of what Starmer would have done terrifying enough! (Though I won't be voting Tory or Labour at the next GE, so I suppose the point is moot).

The trouble with polls is they don't always agree, YouGov on 12/13th July has Mordaunt on 27%, Badenoch on 15%. Head to head - Mordaunt 59%, Badenoch 30%.
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/6shnrhfen6/ConservativePartyMembers_LeadershipContenders_220713_w.pdf.

Their next one (a week later) has Badenoch on 24%, Mordaunt on 20% (next is Truss with 13%), so still pretty close.

 

[takno]

Really, we should be looking towards means testing the state pension

Why? The state pension, including the SERPs bit that's already been stolen from me, is an important part of my planned retirement income. If you think the wealthy should pay more taxes then fine, but pulling the rug out from under people who are no longer in a position to plan for it is just evil.

Even if that wasn't a problem, there's screeds of evidence that means testing is basically a massive waste of resources in bureaucracy, and leaves people in complex situations basically destitute. These are *exactly* the kinds of problems UBI is designed to prevent. The two are absolutely at odds with each other

 

[david1212]

Looks like they are going to screw pensioners over by removing the triple lock.

The 2.5% element of the triple lock will be irrelevant at least until after the latest possible date of the next General Election. What the increases should do is maintain the buying power.
The RPI and CPI while weighted include items that those with just the basic state pension ( new pension ~£9500pa, old is more complex ) can rarely if ever buy. Until April the current unit rates for gas and electricity are capped but compared to 12 months ago at around 2.5x for gas and 2x for electricity offset by the fixed £400 payment split over 6 months. A below average total of £1000pa for April 2021-March 2022 will be approaching £2000 for April 2022-March 2023. Food, household items, toiletries are up far more than 10% over the last 9 months and likely to keep increasing. Hence matching the CPI at just over 10% would be a real income / buying power loss. Just matching wages, ~5% ?, would be a bigger loss.

Really, we should be looking towards means testing the state pension.

NO. It is not a benefit never mind a 'free' one but paid for out of NI contributions other than qualifying years e.g. time in education, caring for a relative ( and thus saving the state a fortune if instead the relative was in a care or nursing home ), entitled to child benefit for at least one child under 12 or incapable of working due to illness or disability. To get the full pension you need 35 qualifying years. If you do not have 10 qualifying years you get nothing. The details are here.


Earlier the FTSE 100 was over 7000 but has closed at 6920 which is .24% up on yesterday and just over 1% up over 2 days. 18 August it was over 7500.
Yesterday GBP was up against USD but has dropped again.
While just two days days no clear fast recovery from Hunt replacing Kwarteng.

 

[Busaholic]

The state pension is already ''means tested'' in that it counts towards an individual's Income Tax liability, although will be paid out free of it. In other words, there are certainly circumstances where some of it may be clawed back by the state.

 

[brad465]

Looks like they are going to screw pensioners over by removing the triple lock.

Starting to wonder if they're now trying to find out how far their polling can sink...by annoying everyone who usually votes for them.

 

[Snow1964]

The financial chaos of Kwasi mini budget (now mainly reversed) has resulted in inflation jump

CPI (consumer price inflation) now 10.1%

 

[nw1]

The financial chaos of Kwasi mini budget (now mainly reversed) has resulted in inflation jump

CPI (consumer price inflation) now 10.1%

Thank you, Liz. Thank you, Kwasi.

 

[AlterEgo]

Looks like they are going to screw pensioners over by removing the triple lock.

About time. That was vampiric given younger people are locked out of capital. One in five pensioners are living in households where they are asset millionaires.

 

[Simon11]

About time. That was vampiric given younger people are locked out of capital. One in five pensioners are living in households where they are asset millionaires.

Its actually higher if you include all wealth- The data also shows that one in four people aged over 65 (25%) lived in a household with a total wealth of over a million pounds.

Source: https://fullfact.org/economy/millionaire-pensioners/

I think if people working are only getting a pay rise of average of c5%, then pensioners should also be hit too and have a similar percentage increase in pension.

 

[najaB]

I suppose someone has to pay for lockdown and its clearly going to be the ordinary citizen.

Lockdowns had their economic impact but that is one that was felt in pretty much every economy worldwide. What wasn't a factor in other countries was the profligate waste of tens of billions of pounds which was funnelled from the Treasury into the pockets of Tory donors. £1B for Eat out to Help Out, £5 billion for PPE that couldn't be used, £20 billion for Track and Trace...

Pretty soon it all adds up and you'll be talking serious money.

It also doesn't help that this government has taken measures to erect barriers to our largest trading partners, exactly that the time that we need them the most.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Oct 2022 ==
------------------------
One good thing about this lot, they are good for comedy. Two good videos from my YouTube feed this morning:

 

[GS250]

Its actually higher if you include all wealth- The data also shows that one in four people aged over 65 (25%) lived in a household with a total wealth of over a million pounds.

Source: https://fullfact.org/economy/millionaire-pensioners/

I think if people working are only getting a pay rise of average of c5%, then pensioners should also be hit too and have a similar percentage increase in pension.

Maybe....like my parents they have earned that right? As my dad would often say to me when I was younger "these hands (pause to make sure he had my attention) these hands have worked in all weathers to put a roof over your head and put food on the table". He'd then go into a lecture about getting us all away from the council housing and giving us a better quality of life than those who just in his words "plodded along" or didn't take the odd chance in life.

However...the same parents including mine are now looking at their children and grandchildren and wondering how the hell they are going to ever get the same quality of life as them. We have had this conversation on here before and there are no easy answers to the scenario quoted above.

 

[najaB]

Maybe....like my parents they have earned that right?

Nobody worth listening to is suggesting forced removal of assets. However, it is legitimate to ask if it's right and fair that pensioners are guaranteed an inflation-matching increase when people of working age - either in work or or benefits - are not.

 

[MikeWM]

However...the same parents including mine are now looking at their children and grandchildren and wondering how the hell they are going to ever get the same quality of life as them.

In many respects this is the key political question of our time, and one that so far the politicians are utterly failing at answering.

How can you - effectively - tell people that their children will, or must, lead smaller, more constrained, more difficult lives than their parents? How do you get the population to agree that this is a good thing? And how do you achieve that without driving people to the 'margins', or to parties that still promise a better future (even if perhaps they can't deliver that).

 

[Gloster]

PMQs are about to start. This is really the last chance for Truss to save her job: if she can get her MPs cheering and waving their order papers, she might be given time to sort things out, if she can. A lacklustre performance and she is one of the walking dead: it is just a question of how long.