Xipe Totec
Something nasty in the woodshed
Those cabinet post announcements, as they happen:
Liz Truss - the first 100 days....
- Thread starter Fab Foodie
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
D
Deleted member 28
Guest
Didn't we have a few none white, none male (dunno what stale is) people in top jobs up until recently and everyone moaned about them.
Rusty Nails
Country Member
Ian H
Legendary Member
Turnover merely gives an indication of the size of the company. It tells you nothing about its profitability, how it treats its employees, or anything else for that matter. And a co-operative structure simply seems to me to be a more efficient way to run a company.
D
Deleted member 28
Guest
Stale is like you and me. Past the first flush of youth.
Some further past than others
And the rest of my comment?
Rusty Nails
Country Member
Last edited:
stowie
Active Member
Liz Truss' first PMQs is on at the moment. It is quite instructive on a number of her replies.
She clearly has ruled out any windfall tax on the oil and gas producers benefiting from the sharp increase in prices. However, she has more than hinted that the government will fix energy costs and fund the difference (which may come to £100bn or more). This will be funded through government borrowing and paid back by the tax-payer over years (or decades). This policy assumes that the price increases are temporary and will have to drop next year back to under the fixed energy cap if the government borrowing on the scheme isn't to spiral. The optics on this look bad, and Labour - if they are remotely competent - will be quick to point it out. In effect the government will be giving huge amounts of money to large oil and gas corporations making massive unexpected profits off the back of international events and domestic energy mismanagement. This will be used (as has been seen recently) on executive bonuses, shareholder dividends and share buy-backs whilst "hard working families" will be footing the bill for the forseeable. If Sunak's loan proposal was deeply unpopular, I doubt this will be any more welcomed.
Truss is also doubling down on reversing the proposed corporation tax increases introduced by Johnson. She is citing the laffer curve with is an old and very well used chestnut to justify tax cuts on the assumption that cutting tax increases revenue. On the basis of these comments she seems on the very libertarian edge of economic policy and I do wonder how much her party will stomach with elections looming in a couple of years.
She clearly has ruled out any windfall tax on the oil and gas producers benefiting from the sharp increase in prices. However, she has more than hinted that the government will fix energy costs and fund the difference (which may come to £100bn or more). This will be funded through government borrowing and paid back by the tax-payer over years (or decades). This policy assumes that the price increases are temporary and will have to drop next year back to under the fixed energy cap if the government borrowing on the scheme isn't to spiral. The optics on this look bad, and Labour - if they are remotely competent - will be quick to point it out. In effect the government will be giving huge amounts of money to large oil and gas corporations making massive unexpected profits off the back of international events and domestic energy mismanagement. This will be used (as has been seen recently) on executive bonuses, shareholder dividends and share buy-backs whilst "hard working families" will be footing the bill for the forseeable. If Sunak's loan proposal was deeply unpopular, I doubt this will be any more welcomed.
Truss is also doubling down on reversing the proposed corporation tax increases introduced by Johnson. She is citing the laffer curve with is an old and very well used chestnut to justify tax cuts on the assumption that cutting tax increases revenue. On the basis of these comments she seems on the very libertarian edge of economic policy and I do wonder how much her party will stomach with elections looming in a couple of years.
Milkfloat
Active Member
Like a lot of government short-termism it kicks the can far enough down the road that those whom were going to suffer this winter won't care too much how their suffering is reduced.
BoldonLad
Old man on a bike. Not a member of a clique.
- Location
- South Tyneside
Exactly. It a Politicians tactic.
Beebo
Veteran
I care hugely.
I don’t want my bills or my kids bills to be high for years to come when energy companies get to keep £100 billion in excess profits.
I can’t understand why the general population aren’t worried about this.
Rusty Nails
Country Member
I can't understand why people vote Tory, voted for Brexit, Trump etc, etc. But it still happens. People do not always think things through, and are often just concerned with their problems today and cannot worry about tomorrow. Politicians know this.
I think most people, except the Tories who are the party for the powerful, would want a windfall tax on the energy industry.
winjim
Welcome yourself into the new modern crisis
Right now I care about feeding my family and heating my home this winter, as I suspect do most people. This loan business is sufficiently opaque that I think a lot of people will probably pay it no mind. A loan paid for by the government from public funds is still our money but it feels a lot different to money coming out of your current account every month.
OP
OP
Fab Foodie
Guru
It's not that they are not worried, more a case of what the hell can we do about it?
I also think many people, especially the less well off and the unemployed are simply punch-drunk with one issue after another to deal with, health, food prices, petrol/diesel prices, yadda yadda. yadda.
I also think most people are quite clueless of the true impact of the proposals being made, just hoping that government will do something in the immediate term.
Rusty Nails
Country Member
If Starmer cannot make the Tories and Truss look bad over this, especially the windfall tax and just saddling people with paying extra in future, then he does not deserve to win the next election.
