advertisement


Tory Leadership Runners and Riders

Count Binface on Truss. (Twitter).

PS The amusing thing is he could have used any number of pictures; orchard, tank, Russian hat, flags, fighter jet etc etc. Truss’s dress-up box of attention seeking PR is huge.
 
Jacob Rees Mogg on telly telling us that civil service pay comes from the earnings of the private sector
 
Mad Truss plan scrapped already - somebody whispered ‘you need a few northern oiks to vote Tory’.
 
monkfish said:
I think it's been widely known here that if you vote anything but Labour, you will annoy the life of Brian.
Click to expand...
LOL

Seriously, this shows a lack of comprehension on your part. The idea, for those who genuinely don’t want a tory govt ( so not you and your fellow travellers ) is to vote with that in mind, avoiding tribalism and grubby nationalism. :D
 
Le Baron said:
Never mind. I find the goalposts a bit too far to the right though, can you shift them for me please?

Off for half-time oranges.
Click to expand...
That’s ok. I don’t mind at all. What are these goalposts you’re worried about?

I hope you enjoyed your orange as much as I enjoyed my fillet steak.
 
How the fcuk can 30% be undecided? They’re supposed to have a brain/clue/private school education/something.
 
Choose Liz
Choose low pay low tax
Choose Brexit
Choose Rwanda

RMpFavY.jpg


Amazing how quiet Farage and Tommeh are. They’ve got the Tories eating out of their shoe.
 
Joe Hutch said:
They're trying to decide which is the least-worst option, and gradually realising that there isn't one.
Click to expand...
I fear they’re simply thinking ‘who beats Keir Starmer’ and will soon sadly conclude ‘any Tory who’s not a complete loon’ or rather ‘doesn’t look and sound like a complete loon’, so at least JRM will never be Prime Minister. Mind you, Farage is both and managed to ruin our country.
 
laughingboy said:
In last night's debate Sunak claimed that unfunded tax cuts would simply be “racking up bills on the country’s credit card that we pass on to our children and grandchildren”.

Here's a non-MMT rejection of that argument:

Tax and borrowing: what will we owe our grandchildren? (New Economics Foundation)
Click to expand...

The rejection is feeble because it says that borrowing is necessary for the government to invest. This is clearly fallacious once one understands that the government is constrained neither by tax nor by borrowing in order to enact its spending objectives.
 
Super Bigote said:
The rejection is feeble because it says that borrowing is necessary for the government to invest. This is clearly fallacious once one understands that the government is constrained neither by tax nor by borrowing in order to enact its spending objectives.
Click to expand...
Yes, that’s true for anyone who accepts the basic arguments of MMT. My aim in sharing the post is that, for those who - for whatever reason - get the heebie-jeebies about MMT, it can still be argued in fairly mainstream Keynesian terms that Sunak is talking nonsense.

Anyway, despite using the terms ‘borrowing’ and ‘funding’ (showing the underlying model is not MMT), in this case, the article says:

“There is also a fourth point, which this blog has made many times before. Government borrowing doesn’t always need to be funded by taxation; it can be monetarily financed, as government borrowing effectively was during the Covid crisis”

There is a lot of common ground out there - it doesn’t always pay to focus only on points of difference.
 
That's okay, but even in the mainstream model "borrowing" isn't tax funded. They're two separate things even in that view.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top