Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 8, 2024 10:31:20 GMT
It is mildly entertaining to witness the intellectual somersaults in real time being played out before me to enable you to conclude that the disastrous Trussonomics were actually the right idea. You see me as someone wanting to be fooled into believing this, when you are so clearly fooling yourself in defence of a cherished idea proven to be disastrous. Like i explained, it did not tank the economy and you are engaging in a childish level of confirmation bias if you sincerely believe it did. You are being led by the nose and allowing because it is easier and more comfortable not to think in this case and so that's what you are doing. You cannot accept the unpalatable facts so you insist upon the truth of your conspiracy theory and think I am the deluded one for not sharing in it. We are arguing with each other from a vantage point of different realities, neither of us recognising the other's. In these circumstances this debate can go nowhere. What I would suggest if you want to discuss this further is to start a thread exclusively devoted to what tanked the economy under Truss - Pacifico thinks it was public spending commitments - offering up any evidence you might have in support of your thesis. Any actual evidence would constitute facts that can be debated, as would any evidence to the contrary. I am however working these next three days so not going to be around much before Sunday |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Feb 8, 2024 10:59:36 GMT
Like i explained, it did not tank the economy and you are engaging in a childish level of confirmation bias if you sincerely believe it did. You are being led by the nose and allowing because it is easier and more comfortable not to think in this case and so that's what you are doing. You cannot accept the unpalatable facts so you insist upon the truth of your conspiracy theory and think I am the deluded one for not sharing in it. We are arguing with each other from a vantage point of different realities, neither of us recognising the other's. In these circumstances this debate can go nowhere. What I would suggest if you want to discuss this further is to start a thread exclusively devoted to what tanked the economy under Truss - Pacifico thinks it was public spending commitments - offering up any evidence you might have in support of your thesis. Any actual evidence would constitute facts that can be debated, as would any evidence to the contrary. I am however working these next three days so not going to be around much before Sunday I agree the conversation serves no point and i feel that further conversation would also be pointless. I do not relish explaining to an unwilling, vested interest party with a tenuous understanding of basic economics, why 'a small tax cut tanked a nation's economy' is an idiotic claim |
|
|
|
Post by Cartertonian on Feb 8, 2024 11:10:20 GMT
I don't know whether it's gratifying...or sad...to see the Tories being riven by splits and factions.
From that noted Leftie, Guido Fawkes:
The newly styled “Five Families” of rebellious Tory MP factions failed to summon any real non-pool-clip related threat to Sunak on Tuesday night. That said, the mob can still cause trouble for Sunak down the line if they manage to organise and not get picked off by the whips so easily. It’s worth knowing who they are. Here’s a summary…
New Conservatives – Led by Danny Kruger and Miriam Cates, this fledgling crew is the newest of “The Five“. It was only founded in May but boasts around 25 MPs, mostly from the Red Wall. The faction makes sound noises on tax (by arguing for cuts), though it’s properly sharpened its claws by pushing for a migration crackdown and advancing “traditional family values“. Cates instructed Guido, amongst others, to have many more kids at a CSJ event in Autumn. Guido will pass, thanks…
European Research Group. Headed up by Brexit capo Mark Francois, this is the most organised crew in the Tory Cosa Nostra. Founded by Michael Spicer in 1993 to battle against the Maastricht Treaty and filled with eurosceptics, they scored major hits against Theresa May during Brexit-deal wrangling in 2018/19. Its “star chamber” of lawyers was used to cast judgement on Brexit legislation and has been revived to cast its verdicts on the Rwanda bill – bringing back some of the ERG’s relevance despite Rwanda being in Africa not Europe. Apart from railing against Rishi on Rwanda the most recent activity has been sticking it to the Windsor Framework. The ERG is the most capable of launching organised attacks…
Common Sense Group. Led by John Hayes, the Independent labels this outfit plain “Trump-style populists“. The CSG, which claims to have around 60 MPs, likes to spend its time on culture war content by attacking Extinction Rebellion, the National Trust, and everything in between. They’re meant to be inspired by the ERG and spend time trying to root out “cultural Marxism” and defend Britain against, err, “greed-driven globalists“. This crew wants migration to fall because it’s too “bourgeois”…
Conservative Growth Group. Established post-Truss last year, this crew is run by former secretaries of state Ranil Jayawardena and Simon Clarke. It’s said to have about 60 neoliberal-minded MPs whose job it is to push for sound economic policy. Priti Patel is a top goombah here despite being no Trussite. Being economically sound is a difficult job with this OBR controlled government…
Northern Research Group – Leading the charge for the north is former Tory party chairman Jake Berry. As dreams of levelling up die so does the operational influence of the NRG. Carlisle MP John Stevenson serves as chairman of this outfit of around 55 northern MPs. Its primary goal is to get more investment for the north. Not Sunak’s strong suit over the last few months…
Not forgetting, of course, the One Nation Caucus that, to my eyes, represents what I always thought Tories were, but which appears to represent a significant number of Tories that the Five Families above disparage as 'Wets', or worse still as people who should be in the Lib Dems or even Labour.
And along comes Truss with another faction.
All factions seem to be claiming that they are speaking for the mythical silent majority. This patently can't be true.
Will the real Tories please stand up?
|
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Feb 8, 2024 11:22:14 GMT
The interesting thing is that the real Tories, at least those who still hold the traditional patrician centre right "One Nation" views are currently fairly silent as all parties prepare for their post election civil war. It is the insurgent "populist" views largely copy and pasted from the old UKIP that is making the most noise but they too seem to be divided into innumerable sects with differences between them unintelligible to most outsiders but felt passionately by insiders. It does all feel a bit Monty Pythonesque. hopefully post election they can decide on a coherent path for the Tory Party, whatever that should be, with those not happy leaving to other parties. The country needs a decent competent Opposition.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 8, 2024 11:29:52 GMT
You cannot accept the unpalatable facts so you insist upon the truth of your conspiracy theory and think I am the deluded one for not sharing in it. We are arguing with each other from a vantage point of different realities, neither of us recognising the other's. In these circumstances this debate can go nowhere. What I would suggest if you want to discuss this further is to start a thread exclusively devoted to what tanked the economy under Truss - Pacifico thinks it was public spending commitments - offering up any evidence you might have in support of your thesis. Any actual evidence would constitute facts that can be debated, as would any evidence to the contrary. I am however working these next three days so not going to be around much before Sunday I agree the conversation serves no point and i feel that further conversation would also be pointless. I do not relish explaining to an unwilling, vested interest party with a tenuous understanding of basic economics, why 'a small tax cut tanked a nation's economy' is an idiotic claim All I will say in response to that is that if you think my beliefs make me an idiot, they are shared by many economists who know far more about economics than either of us, not to mention much of the media commentariat. And have the virtue of not being dependent upon belief in a conspiracy theory, which is always a red flag unless there is evidence to support the existence of such a conspiracy. As for my vested interests, the main political beneficiaries of this narrative are likely to be Labour but I do not support them either. As for the tax cuts themselves, being on a relatively low income I would not have been one of the main beneficiaries but would have benefitted a little. Certainly it would not have cost me anything unless its effects were adverse to the wellbeing of the economy. So I have no vested interest in the failure of the policy, beyond any positive or negative effects it would have had on the economy as a whole. And it does appear to me that the short term effect of uncosted cuts were negative to the economy. Not wanting the economy to be damaged by unfunded commitments in regards to either spending or tax cuts is my only vested interest and it will be one shared by most people. At least by most people not blinded by their desire to believe in Trussonomics. Tax cuts or spending increases need to be done in ways that reassure the markets. In their own very different ways both Margaret Thatcher and Gordon Brown understood this. Thatcher cut income taxes a lot, but they were never unfunded. It was always clear what other taxes would have to increase, or what spending cuts had to be made and where in order to make it affordable. Truss appeared not to understand the need to keep the markets on board, a failing more usually attributed to the left. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Feb 8, 2024 11:34:41 GMT
Not forgetting, of course, the One Nation Caucus that, to my eyes, represents what I always thought Tories were, but which appears to represent a significant number of Tories that the Five Families above disparage as 'Wets', or worse still as people who should be in the Lib Dems or even Labour. And along comes Truss with another faction. All factions seem to be claiming that they are speaking for the mythical silent majority. This patently can't be true. Will the real Tories please stand up? We have had 13 years of government by the One Nation faction - result is that support for the Tories has cratered. So whatever direction Conservative supporters want to go we can be sure it is not more of the same. |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Feb 8, 2024 11:41:03 GMT
I don't know what went on with Truss, can't put my finger on it, but the speed in which she was booted out was breathtaking.
I don't believe it was talk of her tax cuts that would cause a economic meltdown, because Hunt and Sunak have done nothing but talk about the same plan.
|
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Feb 8, 2024 11:42:24 GMT
I agree the conversation serves no point and i feel that further conversation would also be pointless. I do not relish explaining to an unwilling, vested interest party with a tenuous understanding of basic economics, why 'a small tax cut tanked a nation's economy' is an idiotic claim All I will say in response to that is that if you think my beliefs make me an idiot, they are shared by many economists who know far more about economics than either of us, not to mention much of the media commentariat. And have the virtue of not being dependent upon belief in a conspiracy theory, which is always a red flag unless there is evidence to support the existence of such a conspiracy. It doesn't matter how many paid liars are persuaded to fall in line, the notion is still idiotic on a basic level. I'm reminded of the recent expert assertion that the Covid 19 could not possibly have leaked from a Lab. Many fell for that because the lacked the basic tools to be able to see it was idiotic. To give an idea of the moribund and corrupt state 'economics' is in, economic theory that has been rigorously shown to be faulty is still preferred because it serves political interests. Your interests in this matter are broader than the Labour party and stretch to maintaining the public sector soviet in its current position - hence, anyone playing with tax cuts gives you the willies. For someone trying to close off the conversation, you seem to be adding quite a few paragraphs btw. |
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Feb 8, 2024 11:49:42 GMT
Could be that or could be that Tory voters are repelled by the Populists and the appalling performance of the Tories in Government since the populists gained power in the Government under Johnson.
Or more likely could be that like their party, Tory voters are irretrievably split between those who support "one nation" and those who support "populists". Its hard to see how the party can placate and retain both factions going forward.
|
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Feb 8, 2024 12:00:56 GMT
Could be that or could be that Tory voters are repelled by the Populists and the appalling performance of the Tories in Government since the populists gained power in the Government under Johnson. Or more likely could be that like their party, Tory voters are irretrievably split between those who support "one nation" and those who support "populists". Its hard to see how the party can placate and retain both factions going forward. Whatever the details of the factional situation, it is clear that conservatism is a significant strain of UK political opinion. There should of course be at least one major political party representing that strand of political thought. I think that the fact that there currently isn't such a party is at the nub of the instability. |
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Feb 8, 2024 12:07:31 GMT
Could be that or could be that Tory voters are repelled by the Populists and the appalling performance of the Tories in Government since the populists gained power in the Government under Johnson. Or more likely could be that like their party, Tory voters are irretrievably split between those who support "one nation" and those who support "populists". Its hard to see how the party can placate and retain both factions going forward. Whatever the details of the factional situation, it is clear that conservatism is a significant strain of UK political opinion. There should of course be at least one major political party representing that strand of political thought. I think that the fact that there currently isn't such a party is at the nub of the instability. Again though you were almost there and then threw it away at the last minute. Absolutely conservatism has historically been a significant, indeed dominant, strain of UK public opinion. Historically however the Party at least has been the "one nation" form of conservatism. Now some quite legitimately are seeking to move it to the populist wing. Others in the one nation wing do not agree. Its hard to see how those wings can ever be reconciled. It would be better if the electoral system allowed them to split into at least two. Whether the populists would then agree or fight interminably between themselves remains open to question. The history of UKIP and the Pythonesque number of factions on that wing of the party now does not perhaps bode well for them. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Feb 8, 2024 12:15:24 GMT
Whatever the details of the factional situation, it is clear that conservatism is a significant strain of UK political opinion. There should of course be at least one major political party representing that strand of political thought. I think that the fact that there currently isn't such a party is at the nub of the instability. Again though you were almost there and then threw it away at the last minute. Absolutely conservatism has historically been a significant, indeed dominant, strain of UK public opinion. Historically however the Party at least has been the "one nation" form of conservatism. Though conservatism does typically distill out to the support of institutions, no conservative has ever signed on to the notion of unlimited support of institutions regardless of how corrupt, incompetent, malicious or damaging they might be. Conservatism has more fundamental values that this support conditionally draws from. You seem to be engaging in a kind of 'crossword thinking' - getting all the words and letters in the right place, but having very little interest at all in meaning. I suspect a lot of this conversation comes from an inability by some to understand what a principle is. |
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Feb 8, 2024 12:21:18 GMT
Well that's a load of diversionary bollocks Orac. I'll leave you to that rabbithole.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 8, 2024 13:19:06 GMT
I don't know what went on with Truss, can't put my finger on it, but the speed in which she was booted out was breathtaking. I don't believe it was talk of her tax cuts that would cause a economic meltdown, because Hunt and Sunak have done nothing but talk about the same plan. True, it had all the signs of a pre-planned coup d'état which had been arranged whilst she was leading the Tories conference. The weasels were away planning how to get her out before the Queen was cold. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Feb 8, 2024 15:37:34 GMT
Could be that or could be that Tory voters are repelled by the Populists and the appalling performance of the Tories in Government since the populists gained power in the Government under Johnson. Or more likely could be that like their party, Tory voters are irretrievably split between those who support "one nation" and those who support "populists". Its hard to see how the party can placate and retain both factions going forward. Whatever the details of the factional situation, it is clear that conservatism is a significant strain of UK political opinion. There should of course be at least one major political party representing that strand of political thought. I think that the fact that there currently isn't such a party is at the nub of the instability. One effect of the crash and burn of the Sunak administration is very likely to be a realignment of the Tories to a more conservative, less liberal party. They have been in power for 13 years, with at one point a massive 80 seat majority, and yet you would struggle to think of a single conservative policy they have implemented - I think that patience has finally run out with the wet one nation crowd. |
|
