|
Post by alec on Aug 4, 2022 17:12:15 GMT
shevii - "Truss leads Starmer 37% to 35% for best Prime Minister "at the moment". Just thought I'd throw that in there." The great unspoken fear. Everyone - even most Tories - know Truss will be a disaster (as they did with Johnson) but the boosterish claptrap and reality defying certainties she shouts out, despite all the evidence to the contrary, are the dreamy imaginings that downcast voters want to believe in, and the compliant media is willing to regurgitate without serious reflection. I suppose the only bright angle on this is that Johnson, with his superior persona, in terms of public popularity, imploded within two years, so Truss will be doing well if she lasts a year and half before the dazzled recover their sight and see through her.
|
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,164
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Aug 4, 2022 17:13:19 GMT
steve Regarding being right wing, the EU who you are very keen on, are quite right wing economically. Founded on the four pillars of neoliberalism: free movement of goods, services, capital and people. Policies to favour capital. Whereas instead the left tended to favour tariffs to preserve jobs and strategic industry, capital controls to limit offshoring, immigration controls to protect workers etc. There’s quite a big difference between the two, they are quite opposed. That’s not to say the right wing approach doesn’t have some merits. Regarding the EU, I am not purist, I am happy to take bits from right and left. If it were up to me, I would keep the free movement and absence of tariffs of the right, but be more left wing on capital controls and reduce the EU control over state investment etc. (Of course it isn’t up to me and one might not have that offered in practice, whereupon the calculus gets rather more complicated).
|
|
|
Post by alec on Aug 4, 2022 17:18:14 GMT
colin and robbiealive - one of Osborne's first moves in his emergency budget was to slash the annual investment allowance, taking £2.8bn out of industrial investment, as an offset to the £.6bn reduction in Corporation Tax. Post financial crash, only a complete fuckwit would have thought it was a bright idea to encourage profit taking and discourage investment. And then along came the Conservatives. The Conservatives economic record since 2010 is utterly dire, and any Labour administration would have been torn to shreds had they been half as bad as this lot.
|
|
|
Post by catmanjeff on Aug 4, 2022 17:19:02 GMT
thylacine Of course I am and the Greens and SNP and PC and SF and the Alliance and the SDLP and anyone else I've forgotten who has a generally progressive agenda. Just because mathematics particularly under fptp means they may have involvement with right wing parties at local and national level doesn't make them right wing. It's also entirely possible for right wing parties to have some progressive policies. When it's possible to cooperate then of course we should. Rather than pointing fingers and shouting unclean if someone has transgressed dogma or,heaven forfend admits that another political party might actually be the better choice in the circumstances doesn't make them card carrying tories. It's what the left of Labour never seems to grasp.
I would observe that Labour across the board are not very good at working positively with other progressive parties.
Pointing to the left of Labour alone rather misses this point. The whole of Labour, as far as I can see, have showed little interest in cooperation historically, but expect supporters of other progressive parties to do all the flexing.
Recent debates here about the rights and wrongs of expelling Labour members for even daring to 'like' or mildly support other parties' candidates highlights this dilemma and contradiction within the Labour Party. The rules currently seem to demand a total, unswerving support for the Labour Party alone, and anything else is treasonous.
I was with the Greens (I'm not now with any party nor interested in being so), and they, probably like the Libs Dems have a more relaxed attitude to such matters. They aren't nearly as totalitarian about such matters. I'd appreciate feedback from other non-Labour parties if people here know this or otherwise.
We all know many Labour members support and vote for non-Labour candidates when it's in the best interest of beating the Conservatives. They just have to hush it up. I don't know why they can't be more grown up about it and be open.
|
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,164
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Aug 4, 2022 17:20:08 GMT
“A majority of UK adults support bringing energy companies back into public ownership, exclusive polling by Savanta ComRes for LabourList reveals amid the energy crisis that will see household bills rise by £693 on average in April. The new research has found that a total of 55% back the renewed public ownership of energy, while just 8% said they would oppose the policy. 23% said they neither supported nor opposed it, and 15% said they did not know. Among voters who chose to back the Tories at the 2019 general election, majority support was also found, with 55% endorsing the move. 68% of 2019 Labour voters approved of the policy proposal, along with 54% of Lib Dems.” labourlist.org/2022/03/exclusive-majority-of-uk-backs-public-ownership-of-energy-firms-poll-shows/I've always been intrigued too by voters, so disgruntled with the lack of socialist policies on offer from a right wing Labour Party, vote Tory instead. A protest vote, perhaps? Steer Labour leftwards by putting the Tories in? It has a sort of counter-intuitive genius to it I suppose. Another possibility, I suppose, to explain this continuous eccentric voting behaviour, is that the polls on this stuff are load of old Horlicks. Or Hobnobs. that doesn’t necessarily mean polls are Horlicks, but that instead you may not have considered all the reasons why they might switch. E.g. swayed by Brexit and levelling up etc., rightly or wrongly. Or weren’t that socialist and their circumstances changed etc. Polling could do more to divine motives though.
|
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 5,990
Member is Online
|
Post by neilj on Aug 4, 2022 17:21:08 GMT
Personally can't see them going any later than the third quarter of 2024 at the latest. Having an election in the winter is very risky. Appreciate it worked out OK in 2019, but a lot of factors played into that. As some one once said, it's the economy stupid
|
|
|
Post by laszlo4new on Aug 4, 2022 17:26:05 GMT
Perhaps off topic, but as I have recently had conversations about investing in crypto-currencies and NFTs (non-fugnible tokens) with both my kids I thought this may be of interest. If they have heard of NFTs then they must becoming widely known. My advice to both was to treat the money as already lost -- of course because these things are so volatile they could also be millionaires. Personally I wouldn't invest; this article reinforces my views: www.theregister.com/2022/08/04/solana_wallet_slope/?td=rt-3aSolana, Phantom blame Slope after millions in crypto-coins stolen from 8,000 wallets Millions of dollars worth of Solana cryptocurrency and other tokens were stolen from seemingly thousands of netizens this week by thieves exploiting some kind of security weakness or blunder.
From what we can tell, and details are still light, somewhere between $4.5 million and $8 million in coins – including stablecoins USDC and USDT, and Solana's SOL – were taken from roughly 8,000 Slope and Phantom mobile app wallets.The comments are often the best part of El Reg. This one is particularly in tune with my thinking: Somehow I think the target audience of these articles does not intersect the set of gullible morons willing to swap their real cash for imaginary binary bollocks on a blockchain.I stress, of course, that I am NOT offering any investing advice. :-)Couldn't agree more. The whole Blockchain nonsense is another Pyramid scheme. It's the ones left in at the end that will pay the price whilst those that "rode the wave" enjoy spending their cash. While crypto currencies use Blockchain, Blockchain is used extensively in supply chain (e.g. Walmart in Canada, Chinese agricultural export to everywhere in Europe), also by many law firms and real estate companies in the UK, and BoE encourages the use of it (had a few workshop on it as well s a policy document) because of the use of Blockchain in Fintech companies (and there are several thousand of them in the UK in wealth management, insurance, P2P lending, etc.). Added: some of the NHS mobile apps also use Blockchains in combination with Cloud.
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Aug 4, 2022 17:27:46 GMT
carfrew
I agree that there are usually a multiplicity of voting determinants at play in any given general election and that it's possible some policies that, in isolation, may be popular are eclipsed by more powerful determinants that pertain at the time. We've often discussed PM credibility and confidence in stewardship of the economy as amongst the most pressing. These often supercede all others.
The problem is that the explanations of why voters voted in the way that they did can be self serving and framed in ways that try to prove strongly held and entrenched viewpoints. For example I'm not at all convinced that Blairite back stabbing of Corbyn was much to do with his ultimate political failure. Feels like a convenient excuse rather than a proven cause to me. Neither am I convinced that polling evidence on the popularity of particular policies is all that reliable, especially if it never seems to be reflected in voting and election results.
You sort of implied too that Blair burgled his election victories by pretending to be more left wing than he then proved to be. Where's the evidence that he conned voters in this way in the lead up to 1997? After he got rid of Clause IV or when he agreed to adhere to Tory spending plans? What left wing economic policy did he renege on? There's an argument that he was a bit more radical in power than he was in opposition. Brown ran the most redistributive fiscal policy since 1945. Blair didn't like admitting to this triangulation calumny!
|
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,164
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Aug 4, 2022 17:39:20 GMT
carfrew I agree that there are usually a multiplicity of voting determinants at play in any given general election and that it's possible some policies that, in isolation, may be popular are eclipsed by more powerful determinants that pertain at the time. We've often discussed PM credibility and confidence in stewardship of the economy as amongst the most pressing. These often supercede all others. The problem is that the explanations of why voters voted in the way that they did can be self serving and framed in ways that try to prove strongly held and entrenched viewpoints. For example I'm not all convinced that Blairite back stabbing of Corbyn was much to do with his ultimate political failure. Feels like a convenient excuse rather than a proven cause to me. Neither am I convinced that polling evidence on the popularity of particular policies is all that reliable, especially if it never seems to be reflected in voting and election results. You sort of implied too that Blair burgled his election victories by pretending to be more left wing than he then proved to be. Where's the evidence that he conned voters in this way in the lead up to 1997? After he got rid of Clause IV or when he agreed to adhere to Tory spending plans? What left wing economic policy did he renege on? There's an argument that he was a bit more radical in power than he was in opposition. Brown ran the most redistributive fiscal policy since 1945. Blair didn't like admitting to this triangulation calumny! I agree that explanations can be self-serving. One can also just miss something salient unintentionally. That’s why it’s handy to try and consider all the factors to try and be more objective. Regarding the sabotage, it’s theoretically possible it had no effect, but it’s reasonable to assume it might well have cost at least a few percent, and when you consider how close Corbyn came, and indeed led for a while after… Polling can be suspect, but the bigger the margin, the more reliable it is likely to be, and it’s a pretty big margin with energy nationalisation. nationalisation not being reflected in election results is to ignore all the other factors. And indeed that energy might be rather more salient now with the steep hike in bills as Graham pointed out. The main point is that if Starmer offered nationalisation of energy it’s not liable to turn off the voters. It’s unlikely to lead to victory on its own though.
|
|
|
Post by shevii on Aug 4, 2022 17:40:37 GMT
shevii - "Truss leads Starmer 37% to 35% for best Prime Minister "at the moment". Just thought I'd throw that in there." The great unspoken fear. Everyone - even most Tories - know Truss will be a disaster (as they did with Johnson) but the boosterish claptrap and reality defying certainties she shouts out, despite all the evidence to the contrary, are the dreamy imaginings that downcast voters want to believe in, and the compliant media is willing to regurgitate without serious reflection. I suppose the only bright angle on this is that Johnson, with his superior persona, in terms of public popularity, imploded within two years, so Truss will be doing well if she lasts a year and half before the dazzled recover their sight and see through her. Starmer performs better against Sunak which is a puzzle to me. I'm hesitant to put this down to racism as there aren't that many out and out racists in the country even if many more have a damaging casual racism. Maybe some people have taken a view on his performance as Chancellor. Even so I still think Sunak would be more of a problem for Labour but that's only based on my feeling that Truss will show herself up eventually (already doing it to my mind). I was being a bit mischievous on the Starmer v Truss but I did then think how can this be if Lab are on 40% and Tories are on 32% plus maybe pulling in 4% BXP on that question and that's their lot. Don't normally check crossbreaks and assumed a lot of Lab don't knows accounted for this based on their views on Starmer (like I'd have been a don't know for the purposes of not giving any credit to Starmer, although if I literally did have the choice that decided the PM it would have to be Starmer). It's not really the case though as there are only 17% Lab 2019 don't knows. What is very strange is that Truss picks up 24% of Lab 2019 vote (which gives credence to your great unspoken fear and worse because these are people that didn't give the Tories their 80 seat majority). Only LD have a higher 2019 for Truss at 29%, which is again is a bit odd for liberals. Starmer only has 59% of the 2019 Lab vote in his head to head with Truss- is this normal? I, of course, would suggest these are very bad ratings for Starmer on the Lab side of the fence.
|
|
|
Post by thylacine on Aug 4, 2022 17:44:58 GMT
Apologies if this is already posted but conservative home has Truss leading Sunak by 58 to 34. Similar figures to the yougov poll.
|
|
|
Post by lefthanging on Aug 4, 2022 17:46:07 GMT
The new research has found that a total of 55% back the renewed public ownership of energy, while just 8% said they would oppose the policy. 23% said they neither supported nor opposed it, and 15% said they did not know. Yet, in 2019, they voted in large numbers for a party that didn't offer the slightest prospect of bringing energy companies back into public ownership. As of course they did in 1983 and 2017 when these much sought after and enticing policy prescriptions were offered to them. What were they missing? Another possibility, I suppose, to explain this continuous eccentric voting behaviour, is that the polls on this stuff are load of old Horlicks. Or Hobnobs. Hobnobs dumped in horlicks is another possibility. That said I do think that it's at least plausible that the general perception that 'Labour are soft on crime / defence / the economy' play a role, even though voters genuinely agree with Labour policies when put to them. For example (anecdote alert) I have a few relatives who agreed with much of the meat the 2017 manifesto (rail and energy nationalisation, income tax rises for the top 5%) but who identify as right wingers and say they would never vote Labour. When I ask why it is always very high-level complaints about Labour's past management of the economy with a sprinkling of support for the death penalty. They also spend a fair of time complaining about inheritance tax, despite having worked in low income jobs and not owning property. A mystery to me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2022 17:47:49 GMT
I wouldn't say "scathing" of Sunak. I think he is the only one of the duo which would be capable of coping with the factors I posted about. But he shares with Truss a failure to explain them properly and honestly. I'm impressed that , to you, the post pandemic labour market disruption & supply chain seizure , the invasion of Ukraine, the interruption of Russian gas supplies ; and the resultant inflation were all "predictable". Amazing. The Conservative Party isn't "mine" in the sense of being a member of it. It is the ROC offering to voters in this country ( though there was an alternative in 1997) Where has Johnson gone wrong ?. Not taking his role seriously would be my answer. I didn't refer to any of the exogenous causes of the current crisis that you listed but to your dire warnings, which we all recognise & share, of the economic depression & intensification of the cost of living crisis which lie ahead; given the fact that we have had a Tory PM & Chancellor for twelve years , it seems reasonable to ask of one of the government's supporters why we appear to be in a weakned state to deal with these problems; and why the 5 or 6 candidates to replace Johnson are incapable of articulating a response. The government seems adrift & its leading lights quite helpless. If you watched the BoE news conference today you will be aware that the factors I mentioned are the key source of the inflation being experienced. The economic downturn they forecast is a function of it, their interest rate response, and the response of consumers concentrating on necessary , rather than optional expenditure. Here is the MPC Report ( note the range of forecasts in the fan charts):- www.bankofengland.co.uk/monetary-policy-report/2022/august-2022I agree that the current absence of cohesive government and an honest policy response to the MPC report is of grave concern. I await, too, a considered policy response from Keir Starmer . If voters are to abandon the Conservative Party , they really need to understand what response the Labour Party proposes to the scenario outlined by the BoE. Do you know if he has made a statement ?
|
|
|
Post by lefthanging on Aug 4, 2022 17:50:38 GMT
So where does your water come from? (source I mean, before you respond "the tap") Mercian rain for Mercian people? I believe it's from boreholes in Staffordshire. But it was a general point, not meant to be specifically about water. I've met a few boreholes from Staffordshire myself - although none of them have ever offered me any water.
|
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 5,990
Member is Online
|
Post by neilj on Aug 4, 2022 17:56:01 GMT
Has anyone else noticed the Government has gone awol
|
|
|
Post by bardin1 on Aug 4, 2022 17:59:51 GMT
Has anyone else noticed the Government has gone awol What Government?
|
|
|
Post by thylacine on Aug 4, 2022 18:00:25 GMT
I thought the analysis that conservative home came up with for the 58 Truss 34 Sunak split is interesting. Simply they put it down to the fact that Tory members split roughly 2:1 right of party to left of party. This being so they don't expect much change as right of party has chosen it's candidate.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2022 18:09:25 GMT
Some political comments today-all courtesy of Labour List :-
"it is imperative that any future government grips inflation, not exacerbates it. As Prime Minister, I would prioritise gripping inflation, growing the economy and then cutting taxes.”
Sunak
"As Prime Minister, I’d use an emergency budget to kickstart my plan to get our economy growing and offer immediate help to people struggling with their bills. “Through supply side reforms, dealing with burdensome business regulation and cutting taxes, I will get our economy back on track. My tax cuts are necessary, affordable and not inflationary.”
Truss
"“Labour would help households right now by removing the tax breaks that are subsidising oil and gas producers and using that money to help people now, including by cutting VAT on energy bills. “And with our climate investment pledge and plan to buy, make and sell more in Britain, a Labour government will build the strong, secure and fair economy we need.”
Reeves
Starmer -?
On the whole I prefer this :-
" “Staggeringly high inflation is going to hit low-income families hard.We already know seven million low-income families had to sacrifice food, heating, even showers this year because they couldn’t afford them. Many also took on credit to pay their bills and are falling behind on their payments. This will be much harder to pay off with higher interest rates putting more families in financial peril. While the government might have taken a break from acting on the cost-of-living emergency, these families can’t take a holiday from the year of financial fear. They will be wondering why further urgent solutions needed to shore up family finances ahead of the winter are not yet being put in place.
The next Prime Minister should immediately revisit the government’s cost-of-living support to make sure it’s up to the task. They must also increase basic Universal Credit entitlements to ensure that our social security system always, at a minimum, enables people to afford the essentials when they fall on hard times. A simple thing the government can do now is to stop deducting debt repayments from benefits at unaffordable rates, which leaves too little to cover the essentials at the best of times.”
Rowntree Trust
|
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,164
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Aug 4, 2022 18:13:45 GMT
carfrew You sort of implied too that Blair burgled his election victories by pretending to be more left wing than he then proved to be. Where's the evidence that he conned voters in this way in the lead up to 1997? After he got rid of Clause IV or when he agreed to adhere to Tory spending plans? What left wing economic policy did he renege on? There's an argument that he was a bit more radical in power than he was in opposition. Brown ran the most redistributive fiscal policy since 1945. Blair didn't like admitting to this triangulation calumny! There is more than one way to lead people astray. One is to say one thing, but to do another, a la Cleggo. Another is to do stuff your voters might not like, but which you didn’t mention at all. (Or if you do mention it, in careful language that might disguise the reality somewhat). So some labour voters might have been quite surprised by privatising more of the NHS, of introducing the private sector into schools with academies, with ATOS, the Iraq war, ramping up house prices and the big cut to CGT etc. There was also an argument that Labour needed to be sober to get elected but when in power might then do some leftie stuff they didn’t mention. Instead, they tended to do rightie stuff they didn’t mention. (Of course, Starmer has done a bit more of a Cleggo, and has been ditching leftie stuff he said to get the leadership). Additionally, some of these extras Blair did, people were not in the main calling for. Like ATOS or privatising NHS etc. There was little need electorally to do these things, they were indicative of a commitment to right wing - often US-derived - ideology. (Starmer, if you consider some of the DPP stuff, seems possibly quite US-focused as well?)
|
|
alurqa
Member
Freiburg im Breisgau's flag
Posts: 781
|
Post by alurqa on Aug 4, 2022 18:17:07 GMT
Thanks. Its former members include Diane Coyle. I've a lot of respect for her views and often both read her blog and buy some of the books she recommends. A key recommendation is therefore that the Government introduces a fully funded minimum rate of pay for care workers in England where care is being provided through public funds. We propose a starting point of £10.50 per hour which we note the Scottish Government has already implemented; this, however, will not be enough to address the issues and we urge the Government to go significantly further as quickly as possible.I can't find any response from the Home Office.
|
|
|
Post by catmanjeff on Aug 4, 2022 18:18:33 GMT
Some political comments today-all courtesy of Labour List :- "it is imperative that any future government grips inflation, not exacerbates it. As Prime Minister, I would prioritise gripping inflation, growing the economy and then cutting taxes.” Sunak "As Prime Minister, I’d use an emergency budget to kickstart my plan to get our economy growing and offer immediate help to people struggling with their bills. “Through supply side reforms, dealing with burdensome business regulation and cutting taxes, I will get our economy back on track. My tax cuts are necessary, affordable and not inflationary.” Truss "“Labour would help households right now by removing the tax breaks that are subsidising oil and gas producers and using that money to help people now, including by cutting VAT on energy bills. “And with our climate investment pledge and plan to buy, make and sell more in Britain, a Labour government will build the strong, secure and fair economy we need.” Reeves Starmer -? On the whole I prefer this :- " “Staggeringly high inflation is going to hit low-income families hard.We already know seven million low-income families had to sacrifice food, heating, even showers this year because they couldn’t afford them. Many also took on credit to pay their bills and are falling behind on their payments. This will be much harder to pay off with higher interest rates putting more families in financial peril. While the government might have taken a break from acting on the cost-of-living emergency, these families can’t take a holiday from the year of financial fear. They will be wondering why further urgent solutions needed to shore up family finances ahead of the winter are not yet being put in place. The next Prime Minister should immediately revisit the government’s cost-of-living support to make sure it’s up to the task. They must also increase basic Universal Credit entitlements to ensure that our social security system always, at a minimum, enables people to afford the essentials when they fall on hard times. A simple thing the government can do now is to stop deducting debt repayments from benefits at unaffordable rates, which leaves too little to cover the essentials at the best of times.” Rowntree Trust It's seems a distant memory when political parties played it straight with electorate, speaking frankly and dealing with issues head on. We get waffle and BS mostly. Maybe if politicians treated voters with more respect and intelligence, voters may start to see politicians as better than snake oil salesman.
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Aug 4, 2022 18:20:35 GMT
“A majority of UK adults support bringing energy companies back into public ownership, exclusive polling by Savanta ComRes for LabourList reveals amid the energy crisis that will see household bills rise by £693 on average in April. The new research has found that a total of 55% back the renewed public ownership of energy, while just 8% said they would oppose the policy. 23% said they neither supported nor opposed it, and 15% said they did not know. Among voters who chose to back the Tories at the 2019 general election, majority support was also found, with 55% endorsing the move. 68% of 2019 Labour voters approved of the policy proposal, along with 54% of Lib Dems.” labourlist.org/2022/03/exclusive-majority-of-uk-backs-public-ownership-of-energy-firms-poll-shows/Yet, in 2019, they voted in large numbers for a party that didn't offer the slightest prospect of bringing energy companies back into public ownership. As of course they did in 1983 and 2017 when these much sought after and enticing policy prescriptions were offered to them. What were they missing? Why do you think the electorate keeps voting against not only their best interests but also, according to these polls anyway, their clear preferences on how they want the economy organised too? To do it once may be an aberration, twice maybe a coincidence but three times....... I've always been intrigued too by voters, so disgruntled with the lack of socialist policies on offer from a right wing Labour Party, vote Tory instead. A protest vote, perhaps? Steer Labour leftwards by putting the Tories in? It has a sort of counter-intuitive genius to it I suppose. Another possibility, I suppose, to explain this continuous eccentric voting behaviour, is that the polls on this stuff are load of old Horlicks. Or Hobnobs. Whenever I've seen analysis on this, there aren't many direct switchers between Labour and Tories. I think what happens is that if Labour are uninspiring, a chunk of their voters stay at home. I think a general election is a bit like getting a new boss at work. A lot of people will prefer someone who doesn't rock the boat too much rather than someone who wants to change things round and make his mark. I think a lot of the Conservative (and perhaps Blair's) vote comes from these sort of folks. Sometimes of course this is boosted by special circumstances such as fear of Corbyn in 2017 and Brexit in 2019.
|
|
alurqa
Member
Freiburg im Breisgau's flag
Posts: 781
|
Post by alurqa on Aug 4, 2022 18:39:32 GMT
The comments are often the best part of El Reg. This one is particularly in tune with my thinking: Somehow I think the target audience of these articles does not intersect the set of gullible morons willing to swap their real cash for imaginary binary bollocks on a blockchain.I stress, of course, that I am NOT offering any investing advice. :-)Couldn't agree more. The whole Blockchain nonsense is another Pyramid scheme. It's the ones left in at the end that will pay the price whilst those that "rode the wave" enjoy spending their cash. Blockchain itself is fine, indeed it's an interesting algorithm as it offers a publicly visible immutable list of previous transactions. It was invented to support selling weed (and other stuff) on the 'dark web.' I think every bank globally is developing a blockchain project, as they can see the benefit of it. The problem here is with the lack of regulation. This was attractive with bitcoin because you couldn't be traced. If you wanted to buy some weed you'd accept the risk that you may lose your money. But then it was Hobson's choice, and you knew you may lose your payment.
For most people, you give somebody your money, and you trust they will manage it as you expect. But, as you say it's a pyramid scheme -- if they do a runner what can you do? Bitcoin, the original, was 'relatively' safe, because everyone used it. But with the plethora of crypto schemes, which do you trust? It's a big and interesting topic, but I would not put any of my money in it.
A few central banks are researching the crypto concept. Including our own BoE: www.bankofengland.co.uk/research/digital-currenciesUK central bank digital currency We are looking carefully at how a UK central bank digital currency (CBDC) might work. But we have not yet made the decision to introduce one
|
|
|
Post by graham on Aug 4, 2022 18:41:20 GMT
Yet, in 2019, they voted in large numbers for a party that didn't offer the slightest prospect of bringing energy companies back into public ownership. As of course they did in 1983 and 2017 when these much sought after and enticing policy prescriptions were offered to them. What were they missing? Another possibility, I suppose, to explain this continuous eccentric voting behaviour, is that the polls on this stuff are load of old Horlicks. Or Hobnobs. Hobnobs dumped in horlicks is another possibility. That said I do think that it's at least plausible that the general perception that 'Labour are soft on crime / defence / the economy' play a role, even though voters genuinely agree with Labour policies when put to them. For example (anecdote alert) I have a few relatives who agreed with much of the meat the 2017 manifesto (rail and energy nationalisation, income tax rises for the top 5%) but who identify as right wingers and say they would never vote Labour. When I ask why it is always very high-level complaints about Labour's past management of the economy with a sprinkling of support for the death penalty. They also spend a fair of time complaining about inheritance tax, despite having worked in low income jobs and not owning property. A mystery to me. Most voters are pretty ignorant when it comes to economic history. How many are aware that Thatcher inherited lower inflation from Labour in May 1979 than Wilson did from the Tories in March 1974? Very few indeed are likely to know that only one Government since World War 2 has bequeathed both a Balance of Payments Surplus and a Budget Surplus to its successor - namely Wilson's Labour Government in 1970.
|
|
|
Post by peterbell on Aug 4, 2022 18:54:17 GMT
Currently watching the prelude to the debate. Either I am blind or Tories look a lot younger than their real age. I have only seen a couple of people interviewed who appear over 60 never mind the supposed average age of 65. Obviously a truly representative audience!!. Suspect it will favour Sunnak.
|
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,164
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Aug 4, 2022 18:57:24 GMT
The comments are often the best part of El Reg. This one is particularly in tune with my thinking: Somehow I think the target audience of these articles does not intersect the set of gullible morons willing to swap their real cash for imaginary binary bollocks on a blockchain.god, I used to read the Register avidly, and Slashdot and Ars Technica and all that. Haven’t read them in ages though.
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Aug 4, 2022 18:59:12 GMT
Some political comments today-all courtesy of Labour List :- "it is imperative that any future government grips inflation, not exacerbates it. As Prime Minister, I would prioritise gripping inflation, growing the economy and then cutting taxes.” Sunak "As Prime Minister, I’d use an emergency budget to kickstart my plan to get our economy growing and offer immediate help to people struggling with their bills. “Through supply side reforms, dealing with burdensome business regulation and cutting taxes, I will get our economy back on track. My tax cuts are necessary, affordable and not inflationary.” Truss "“Labour would help households right now by removing the tax breaks that are subsidising oil and gas producers and using that money to help people now, including by cutting VAT on energy bills. “And with our climate investment pledge and plan to buy, make and sell more in Britain, a Labour government will build the strong, secure and fair economy we need.” Reeves Starmer -? On the whole I prefer this :- " “Staggeringly high inflation is going to hit low-income families hard.We already know seven million low-income families had to sacrifice food, heating, even showers this year because they couldn’t afford them. Many also took on credit to pay their bills and are falling behind on their payments. This will be much harder to pay off with higher interest rates putting more families in financial peril. While the government might have taken a break from acting on the cost-of-living emergency, these families can’t take a holiday from the year of financial fear. They will be wondering why further urgent solutions needed to shore up family finances ahead of the winter are not yet being put in place. The next Prime Minister should immediately revisit the government’s cost-of-living support to make sure it’s up to the task. They must also increase basic Universal Credit entitlements to ensure that our social security system always, at a minimum, enables people to afford the essentials when they fall on hard times. A simple thing the government can do now is to stop deducting debt repayments from benefits at unaffordable rates, which leaves too little to cover the essentials at the best of times.” Rowntree Trust Why would Starmer's view be any different to his Shadow Chancellor's? Are you disappointed he hasn't got another view? He did say this the other day:- labour.org.uk/press/keir-starmer-speech-on-delivering-a-fresh-start-for-britain/Being even handed, they are all a bit platitudinous and motherhood and apple pie, but it's a bit unfair to accuse Starmer of not competing in the vaccuous platitude contest with all the others. Sunak, Truss, Reeves etc. Mind you, Sunak and Truss are competing to be our next PM in a few weeks time. For them to be talking platitudinous gibberish is rather more worrying don't you think? Starmer's excuse is he has a little more time to flesh it all out. Platitudes from serving Cabinets Ministers is scary.
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Aug 4, 2022 19:09:33 GMT
Couldn't agree more. The whole Blockchain nonsense is another Pyramid scheme. It's the ones left in at the end that will pay the price whilst those that "rode the wave" enjoy spending their cash. Paypal has a version now. I thought they'd be a more reliable platform than some I'd seen, so put £20 in just to see how it worked. Last time I looked it was worth £11.
|
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,164
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Aug 4, 2022 19:11:47 GMT
An interesting take on public sector pay restraint Yes, well worth a read. This bit leapt out rather: “ Britain uses monetary policy to target inflation; it has been decades since we had a so-called incomes policy to fight inflation. Indeed, the pay review bodies, panels that advise ministers on public pay levels, are only asked to consider how best to run the services. For example, the review panel for teachers has a mandate “to promote recruitment and retention, within the bounds of affordability across the school system as a whole”. It is not asked to think about other wage-setters.
It’s not unreasonable to think that public sector pay settlements could be used as benchmarks for other employers. But if you try to use the single public sector pay instrument to target both public sector retention and inflation, you will end up missing at least one of them. And, right now, it is almost certainly going to be retention that suffers.
After 12 years of squeezing, Britain simply has no room to use public sector budgets as anti-inflationary ballast. Take the NHS, where 6.6mn people in England are on a waiting list. That’s well over 10 per cent of the country. My colleague John Burn-Murdoch has already written that it is possible that NHS performance means a large number of people are struggling to return to work after the pandemic.”
|
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,164
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Aug 4, 2022 19:14:00 GMT
Couldn't agree more. The whole Blockchain nonsense is another Pyramid scheme. It's the ones left in at the end that will pay the price whilst those that "rode the wave" enjoy spending their cash. Paypal has a version now. I thought they'd be a more reliable platform than some I'd seen, so put £20 in just to see how it worked. Last time I looked it was worth £11. Do you happen to own a lot of swampland, Pete?
|
|