economic situation is dire

[tonyh29]

Wages are now rising at a stronger pace than inflation for the first time since 2009, easing the squeeze on household budgets.

Bank of England Governor Mark Carney said he expected real terms wage growth to rise from zero to about 2% by the end of next year.

He added that the base rate was unlikely to rise from its historic low of 0.5% before next autumn as he delivered the latest Inflation Report.

"We are seeing the first tentative signs of the long-awaited pickup in wage growth," he said.

 

more on the evil since 2010 web page

[bickster]

Wages are now rising at a stronger pace than inflation for the first time since 2009, easing the squeeze on household budgets.

Bank of England Governor Mark Carney said he expected real terms wage growth to rise from zero to about 2% by the end of next year.

He added that the base rate was unlikely to rise from its historic low of 0.5% before next autumn as he delivered the latest Inflation Report.

"We are seeing the first tentative signs of the long-awaited pickup in wage growth," he said.

 

more on the evil since 2010 web page

On month where inflation was below wage increases and it was all down to the drop in oil prices being passed on to the consumer in supermarkets, the average wage rise didn't increase, it was inflation falling. And if you believe all the monetarist economists, inflation is falling to dangerously low levels!

[snowychap]

On month where inflation was below wage increases and it was all down to the drop in oil prices being passed on to the consumer in supermarkets, the average wage rise didn't increase, it was inflation falling. And if you believe all the monetarist economists, inflation is falling to dangerously low levels!

Indeed - as indicated further down the article, it looks like Mr Carney believes he will be writing an open letter to the chancellor before the election comes.

[tonyh29]

 

On month where inflation was below wage increases and it was all down to the drop in oil prices being passed on to the consumer in supermarkets, the average wage rise didn't increase, it was inflation falling. And if you believe all the monetarist economists, inflation is falling to dangerously low levels!

Indeed - as indicated further down the article, it looks like Mr Carney believes he will be writing an open letter to the chancellor before the election comes.

 

 

 

I wont read it unless it includes this

 

[snowychap]

I wont read it unless it includes this

 

The depressing thing is neither will Osborne.

[MakemineVanilla]

 

 

Wages are now rising at a stronger pace than inflation for the first time since 2009, easing the squeeze on household budgets.

Bank of England Governor Mark Carney said he expected real terms wage growth to rise from zero to about 2% by the end of next year.

He added that the base rate was unlikely to rise from its historic low of 0.5% before next autumn as he delivered the latest Inflation Report.

"We are seeing the first tentative signs of the long-awaited pickup in wage growth," he said.

 

more on the evil since 2010 web page

 

On month where inflation was below wage increases and it was all down to the drop in oil prices being passed on to the consumer in supermarkets, the average wage rise didn't increase, it was inflation falling. And if you believe all the monetarist economists, inflation is falling to dangerously low levels!

 

 

The problem with the chosen solution to the recession and which has caused the standard of living crisis, has been inflation which has eroded purchasing power, as wages have been frozen.

 

What is interesting about the recession between 1922 to just before WW2, is that although the economy was as flat as a witch's tit for more than a decade, prices fell, which preserved people's standard of living.

 

Bost are exactly what Hayek et al predicted.

Edited November 14, 2014 by MakemineVanilla

[Xann]

On Nov. 16, the G20 will implement a new policy that makes bank deposits on par with paper investments, subjecting account holders to declines that one might experience from holding a stock or other security when the next financial banking crisis occurs. Additionally, all member nations of the G20 will immediately submit and pass legislation that will fulfill this program, creating a new paradigm where banks no longer recognize your deposits as money, but as liabilities and securitized capital owned and controlled by the bank or institution.

In essence, the Cyprus template of 2011 will be fully implemented in every major economy, and place bank depositors as the primary instrument of the next bailouts when the next crisis occurs...

 

Clicky

 

Sold down the river, again.

[bickster]

On Nov. 16, the G20 will implement a new policy that makes bank deposits on par with paper investments, subjecting account holders to declines that one might experience from holding a stock or other security when the next financial banking crisis occurs. Additionally, all member nations of the G20 will immediately submit and pass legislation that will fulfill this program, creating a new paradigm where banks no longer recognize your deposits as money, but as liabilities and securitized capital owned and controlled by the bank or institution.

In essence, the Cyprus template of 2011 will be fully implemented in every major economy, and place bank depositors as the primary instrument of the next bailouts when the next crisis occurs...

 

Clicky

 

Sold down the river, again.

Back to the mattress for savings then.

On a completely different note. Japan just gone into recession caused by implementing new sales tax which caused people to not spend money.

[MakemineVanilla]

The best analogy I have heard, so far, to describe the difference between the Conservatives' solution to reducing government expenditure and Labour's, is that with the Conservatives, they claim that our diet is working because we gain weight slower than we used to, and Labour say we don't need to be on a diet, there just needs to be more fat acceptance.

[peterms]

For me the analogy is more like the parents of a child concerned about him growing and needing new clothes from time to time, who decide to cope with the situation by hacking chunks off his body so the old clothes still fit.

[blandy]

The best analogy I have heard, so far, to describe the difference between the Conservatives' solution to reducing government expenditure and Labour's, is that with the Conservatives, they claim that our diet is working because we gain weight slower than we used to, and Labour say we don't need to be on a diet, there just needs to be more fat acceptance.

I don't think it's a very good analogy because Labour have said they'll stick to the Tory spending plans if they get in.

So the difference between them is more like "with the Conservatives, they claim that our diet is working because we gain weight slower than we used to, and Labour's real words say that we need to stay on our diet because we gain weight slower than we used to".

 

or more succinctly "they're both wrong"

[peterms]

Strivers, skivers, fantasisers.

 

 

New book challenges the popular myths surrounding the welfare state

 

A new book by John Hills challenges the "strivers versus skivers" myths that underpin current political debate around welfare benefits.

Extensive research presented in Good Times, Bad Times: the welfare myth of them and us contests the common perception that what most of the welfare state does is fund hand-outs to a minority of unemployed, feckless "spongers" who are content to live long-term on benefits.

In reality, research shows that people's lives are constantly changing as their income fluctuates from birth to old age. Most of us benefit from the welfare state at different points in our lives, getting back roughly what we paid in.

Hills, Professor of Social Policy and Director of the Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion (CASE) at LSE, commented: "Our research clearly demonstrates that there is no 'them and us' – just us, and we all stand to lose out from the current misconceptions driving the welfare policy debate."

Key points of the book are: 

• Much of the current policy and political debate around ‘welfare’ is misconceived, conducted as if the central issues around the welfare state were about handouts to an unchanging welfare dependent minority – ‘them’ – paid for by an equally unchanging group of taxpayers – ‘us’.
• 
  
• In reality, research shows that people’s lives are constantly changing. People move in and out of work.The incomes of many in work change substantially from week to week and month to month. People’s positions change over their life cycles. People move in and out of poverty, and so many more are touched by it over a run of years than at any one time. Half of those going on to Job Seeker's Allowance leave it in no more than two months.
• 
  
• Most spending on the welfare state – and the source of its rising cost as the population ages – is on the NHS, education, and pensions, from which everyone benefits.This means that most people have a major stake in its operation – equivalent to the value of up to 25 years’ worth of average net annual incomes for a typical household.
• 
  
• As a result most of us benefit from the welfare state at some points in our lives, and pay towards it at others.
• 
  
• Only £1 in every £12.50 spent on the welfare state goes on benefits and tax credits for those who are currently out of work.
• 
  
• The result of these misconceptions is that one group of people find themselves at the sharp end of ‘welfare reforms’ designed to make substantial savings from what is in reality only a small part of the budget, leaving some in hardship.
• 
  
• But the misperception of who the system serves also means that choices are being made that fail to recognise the interests of the vast majority of us who have a large stake in it.
• 
  

Notes

Good Times, Bad Times: the welfare myth of them and us is published by Policy Press on November 12^th 2014. http://www.policypress.co.uk/display.asp?K=9781447320036

 

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

So we're expecting another crash, it seems.

 

I tremble at the thought of 'austerity' measures that will come into effect if that happens.

[chrisp65]

Yes, we're all being warned to brace ourselves, which could well be a self fulfilling prediction. If the PM and Chancellor put out a message that 'more shit is coming' what does that do for investment in business?

 

Of course, this time it won't be a 100% home grown downturn as with the international banking crisis. This time it will be because of all the others.

[peterms]

They seek the safety of crowds. Not safety as in avoiding the coming calamity, but just trying to avoid blame by doing what the others are doing.

We should expect more from those who present themselves as our leaders. They are followers, tiresome, uninventive drudges, who have no ideas beyond their own advancement. We should remove them at the earliest opportunity, and undo their harmful and destructive policies.

[tonyh29]

Warn it's coming and then claim the credit 6 months later when it doesn't and say it was all down to your government oh and by the way there is a general election next week

Or maybe a genuine warning to try and look like this years Vince Cable ...

Note to David , either way don't claim to have saved the world

Edited November 20, 2014 by tonyh29

[MakemineVanilla]

The situation just doesn't look solvable by any party.

 

No party has the nerve to start paying down the debt because the electorate would just vote for the party which promised eternal happiness and prizes for all.

 

They can't chase big capital for tax because they are free to leave and once again the electorate are not likely to be willing to endure any discomfort a show of principle might entail.

 

I don't think 'crash' is the right word to describe what is happening, which if it is a crash, is a crash in slow-motion.

 

Whoever gets into power will do exactly what they are doing now: manage the slow impoverishment of the electorate by continued policies which destroy people's savings and erode people's pay, while the weakening of the currency will artificially inflate the value of assets and shares, which they will present as positive signs of their economic genius.

 

So I just see slow economic decline for another decade and an increasing gulf between the tax-payer funded public-sector workers pay and that of workers in the private sector.

 

The GDP will increase due to continuing immigration but GDP per capita will decline, as the low cost of labour will deter investment.

 

Surplus labour will ensure a disciplined and tractable workforce.

Edited November 20, 2014 by MakemineVanilla

[Awol]

The situation just doesn't look solvable by any party.

No party has the nerve to start paying down the debt because the electorate would just vote for the party which promised eternal happiness and prizes for all.

And there is the issue. Unless you subscribe to the idea that the government can 'print' evermore new currency (it can) without consequence (it can't) then it comes back to the issue of debt, and far from paying it down we can't even dream of balancing the books without elements of society going postal.

We live and have been living way beyond our means as a country. We're far from alone in that dilemma, most of the western world has the same problem. How to sort it out is a very big question, but as you suggest it's one politicians are too scared even to ask.

The crash saw a huge transfer of wealth from west to east and we'll be living with the consequences and trying to adjust for a very long time yet.

[chrisp65]

If people were offered the following policy:

 

We will cancel all debt, all debt from your credit card, the mortgage, the national debt and what your local hospital owes. We will then all have to live within our means.

 

I think the second half of that policy would kill it dead. We've all got too used to comfort and the idea of money actually being abstract and somebody else somewhere else will settle up at some other time. But not us, here, now.

[CVByrne]

If people were offered the following policy:

 

We will cancel all debt, all debt from your credit card, the mortgage, the national debt and what your local hospital owes. We will then all have to live within our means.

 

I think the second half of that policy would kill it dead. We've all got too used to comfort and the idea of money actually being abstract and somebody else somewhere else will settle up at some other time. But not us, here, now.

 

Therein lies the problem behind all of this. People by and large got themselves into trouble but don't ever want to admit their on culpability in their current situation. It can and is only the fault of others, government, banks, immigrants etc..