If you were still in any doubt about the Tories motivations then their 'backers' in the IEA just removed any such element.
And yet on Newsnight (before the slight upturn), he was telling Kirsty when the market was falling it wasn't related OR important. Every time I see this slime ball, I think of Mick Lynch calling him out for being the lying **** he is, to his face.
The only flaw in this plan is that if the country's down the ****hole, no amount of Labour bashing will prevent them winning. I suppose it may be a case of damage limitations in keeping the majority down. I can't see dumping Lizzy in 2 years close to a GE is going to be a good look either tbh.
The trouble with the growth growth growth mantra is who and how is this going to happen? For example, the markets seem to be spooked by this "mini budget" so the pound goes down. Where I work we have to buy our raw material from overseas, which has suddenly become more expensive. Add that to inflation and the cost of electricity etc (we use a lot of electricity) and our costs have increased rapidly. So on this sample of one business there is no chance we are going to grow, and I suspect that will be the case of other firms like us. So I ask again, where is this growth coming from? Generally of course the government panders to big business, but its the small and medium firms that actually drive the growth, like ours, and we can't.
Devaluing a currency to stimulate 'growth' will surely only effectively work if there is a strong internally resourced manufacturing base, which makes export products more attractive. There is no such base left in the UK, so, if they were genuine, the Gov are (literally) banking on the Financial sector to make this win. That won't happen though and they know it. Which brings it all back to the question 'why do it?' - and that would appear to be where the personal gain corruption element comes back in, at the expense of the general population and the environment. Feckin' Crooks & Charlatans!
He seems to think that the context helps him: It doesn't. Not even remotely. It probably makes it worse, in fact. Twat. He's a Southampton supporter. I hope they go down. Cancer sponsored ****.
They'll probably resurrect Johnson, having thought about it. Make him out to be the victim of a vicious media campaign supported by backstabbers. Then ban voting or something. About 30% of the population would still be in favour of them.
And that's just the financial aspect of it. They've destroyed education, broken the NHS and crashed the justice system, too. We've got no energy storage and they've flogged off anything not nailed down. Is anything better? Anything?
If I postulated that they were alien impostors determined to ruin the country I can see no evidence that would contradict that.
Just seen this diagram on BBC. please log in to view this image So I think it's telling me that these tax / insurance cuts cost the government (us) £5,220 for a £200,000 earner, and £167 for a £20,000 earner. While clearly there are far far more £20,000 earners, it is also hard to get away from the idea that to give back this amount to a £200,000 earner costs a bit over 31 times as much as it does to the £20,000 earner. One might ask who needs it most. Or you might say that if you didn't pay anything to a £200,000 earner, you could double the payment to 31 of the lowest earners. Yeah, it doesn't work like that but it feels that it does. And it makes it harder to convince people who the government is really interested in. Plus we know that "trickle down" economics has never worked.
I heard trickle down economics described as You buy a meal for the richest bloke in the restaurant with the vain hope that he let's you lick his plate when he's finished
It isn't going to for some time (certainly not within the possible maximum lifetime of the current UK parliament) . In a time of global monetary inflation, the man in the street is going to have no spending appetite for "non-essentials" . So the only compelling products/service at the moment for consumers will ironically be those that (near) immediately reduce energy resource consumption costs.
Bloody hell.... This planet-destroying Government of fools has managed to upset the RSPB to the point of rebellion...what's next, David Attenborough to lead a petrol bomb throwing mob to No 10
