Liz Truss Resigns [Who'll be the next Prime Minister?]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

You are missing two important points. Firstly, this move simply brings us into line with our competitors. Secondly, the cap didn’t even work, because employers simply raised basic pay to make up for the cap on bonuses.

But all you can see is they get much more than you. It’s time to start thinking about what’s in the interests of the economy. For God’s sake, we are relying on better economic performance to fund our public services. This is not the time to show jealousy towards people earning more than us when there is a greater good to be achieved.

I would wait to see if they u-turn on this before defending to the hilt

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

But all you can see is they get much more than you. It’s time to start thinking about what’s in the interests of the economy.

Here's a thought OB, rather than speculate on the income, wealth or otherwise of forum members why don't you accept that your understanding of economics is bordering on illiterate?

In no way shape or form does the so called growth plan deliver growth, against any independent barometer.

It's an attack on the working people of this great nation, which explains why you salivate over the prospect of it more than those well known lefties Michael Gove, Rishi Sunak and Grant Shapps.

The good news is at £65bn the Bank of England bailout eclipse Brown's (well intentioned) losses on gold. So you can retire that old trope, old boy.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-p...ost_type=share

20:11
Long-awaited debt plan to be provided shortly

Faisal Islam
BBC Economics Editor

The government is to pull forward its long awaited debt plan from late November, the BBC understands.

The Treasury Select Committee, former Chancellor George Osborne, and many in the markets have advised the government not to allow a hiatus of several weeks’ market speculation over how its numbers will add up.

The chancellor told the Conservative conference that the figures would be provided “shortly” rather than 23 November.

While the date is to be confirmed, it could occur this month, after the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) told the Treasury it could complete its deliberations in a faster timeframe.

The OBR will cost all the policies announced by the chancellor and provide new numbers for borrowing.

The budget watchdog will also cast judgement on the government’s claims that its raft of reform policies will boost the growth of the economy.

The numbers will set the parameters for critical decisions on the extent of spending cuts required to meet the chancellor’s fiscal targets, given the £43bn in unaccounted tax cuts.

It is the latest sign that Number 11 is willing to do what it takes to regain confidence lost since the mini-budget, following the acknowledgement of problems with the mini-budget and the U-turn over the scrapping of the 45p rate.

But the decisions revealed by the OBR analysis will lead to a different set of tough decisions - how to make the numbers add up. Independent analysts say the scale of required cuts could rival the 2010 coalition austerity programme.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Hugh

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-p...ost_type=share

I can't wait.

Who knows, the first report in 50 years of trickle down economics working in a major economy?

Maybe not.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-63110543

Mad Nads says to call an election. I agree time to end rudderless leadership of the fifth, sixth, seventh? Largest economy in the world. I lose count (in dollars, purchasing power parity etc).

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by ianch99

On the subject of banker's bonuses, you may not realise that the EU rule that they are repealing caps bonuses at a maximum of 200% of the base salary.

Can anyone here tell me who is getting a 200%+ bonus on top of their base salary?

That's a question rendered in leftie spite not logic. Bankers are not like the rest of us in terms of their jobs. Their industry provides a huge chunk of the UK's tax revenues and the more they earn, the more they pay.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

That's a question rendered in leftie spite not logic. Bankers are not like the rest of us in terms of their jobs. Their industry provides a huge chunk of the UK's tax revenues and the more they earn, the more they pay.

If they're that good it should be consolidated pay. Pay them millions. Taxed at 45% sounds good to me. Reasonable reward for a good day at work if the shareholders say so.

Bonuses encourages perverse behaviours at the roulette wheel underwritten by the taxpayer.

If they're not that good, or it depends on how well you know Kwasi Kwarteng or any of the insiders attempting to steer this hapless government then I'd suggest jail rather than reward.

[Dave42]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

That's a question rendered in leftie spite not logic. Bankers are not like the rest of us in terms of their jobs. Their industry provides a huge chunk of the UK's tax revenues and the more they earn, the more they pay.

and the bankers caused the 2008 world wide financial crisis started it America that is why EU made the banker bonus cap rule for

[1andrew1]

Rees-Mogg's suggestions kicked into touch

No 10 quashed ‘half-baked’ Rees-Mogg labour market reforms

Liz Truss, the UK prime minister, has quashed a series of “half-baked” ideas put forward by business secretary Jacob Rees-Mogg to radically reform Britain’s labour market.

Rees-Mogg wanted to slash workplace rights, including introducing a form of no-fault dismissal for higher earners and repealing the 48-hour week, according to senior government insiders.

But a Number 10 source said there were limits to Truss’s enthusiasm for deregulation: “Several unworkable and half-baked ideas have been suggested and have been rejected.”

In a sign of policy tensions with Rees-Mogg, the source added: “The prime minister wants to reduce burdens on small business but there’s not going to be a bonfire of employment regulation.”

As well as introducing no-fault dismissals for people earning more than £50k a year, Rees-Mogg suggested scrapping corporate reporting requirements for the gender pay gap and the speed with which companies pay their suppliers, said people with knowledge of the discussions.

The business secretary has also proposed removing rights that enable agency workers to “passport” to full employment rights, along with the repeal of the working time directive.

But Truss’s allies said Rees-Mogg’s ideas were either half-formed or unacceptable. The prime minister has said that she would not touch anybody’s holiday entitlement or make any significant changes to the working time directive.

http://12ft.io/proxy?q=https://www.f...2-d1553c6e47ec

[Dave42]

Originally Posted by jfman

If they're that good it should be consolidated pay. Pay them millions. Taxed at 45% sounds good to me. Reasonable reward for a good day at work if the shareholders say so.

Bonuses encourages perverse behaviours at the roulette wheel underwritten by the taxpayer.

If they're not that good, or it depends on how well you know Kwasi Kwarteng or any of the insiders attempting to steer this hapless government then I'd suggest jail rather than reward.

exactly this

[jfman]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Rees-Mogg's suggestions kicked into touch

https://www.ft.com/content/799ed62c-...2-d1553c6e47ec

OB will be seething, these are a staple of the supply side reforms he has wet dreams about.

---------- Post added at 20:18 ---------- Previous post was at 20:17 ----------

Originally Posted by Dave42

exactly this

If they're good pay them plenty, they deserve it. Tax it.

Job done.

Originally Posted by FT (Andrew's link)

As well as introducing no-fault dismissals for people earning more than £50k a year

I thought we wanted to attract high earners

[Dave42]

Originally Posted by jfman

OB will be seething, these are a staple of the supply side reforms he has wet dreams about.

---------- Post added at 20:18 ---------- Previous post was at 20:17 ----------



If they're good pay them plenty, they deserve it. Tax it.

Job done.

exactly right

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by jfman

If they're that good it should be consolidated pay. Pay them millions. Taxed at 45% sounds good to me. Reasonable reward for a good day at work if the shareholders say so.

Bonuses encourages perverse behaviours at the roulette wheel underwritten by the taxpayer.

If they're not that good, or it depends on how well you know Kwasi Kwarteng or any of the insiders attempting to steer this hapless government then I'd suggest jail rather than reward.

The Global Financial Crisis (GFC) happened due to weak regulation. We need to be very careful before undoing any of the post-GFC legislation. Truss and Kwarteng need to do their home work on this very thoroughly first; we don't want to forget the lessons of the past. I worry that a team who have lost the country £65bn have the skills and temperament to make such important decisions.

To be fair banker bonuses weren't the cause of the crash and the majority of legislation that was put in to combat the causes remains.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

The Global Financial Crisis (GFC) happened due to weak regulation. We need to be very careful before undoing any of the post-GFC legislation. Truss and Kwarteng need to do their home work on this very thoroughly first; we don't want to forget the lessons of the past.

I agree, Governments and weak regulation created a monster, and had to bail it out. The individual "banker" acted entirely rationally, as did the shareholders of the banks consolidating their colossal losses.

---------- Post added at 20:30 ---------- Previous post was at 20:27 ----------

Originally Posted by Damien

To be fair banker bonuses weren't the cause of the crash and the majority of legislation that was put in to combat the causes remains.

What do we want?

Consolidated pay for the super rich.

When do we want it?

2007. If not, NOW!

Bonus or not the banks will find ways to reward the traders who make money for them. You have to regulate the market itself to avoid what happened in 2008. The cap on bonuses was always a populist measure rather than one that genuinely was implemented to stop another crash. I don't think it's smart politics to get rid of it now nor one that'll make much difference to the economy but I don't care that much.

We need to keep an eye on them revoking regulation that is important but more technical. It would be worse if they kept the banker bonuses pretending that's helping whilst revoking liquidity regulations on the banks themselves for example.