Economics.

[EFLImpudence]

This speculative increase in interest rates being enough to cause the pound to rise in value.

which will, of course, result in the price of petrol (paid for in dollars) falling.

 

[Doggit]

subsidies?

Now play straight, and add in all the Labou politicians who are also fiddling their expenses.

As the cause, if true as stated before, is the cost of petrol and clothes (produced abroad) and a higher price because of the value of the pound, and not consumer spending caused by inflationary wage rises, then why does this make it necessary to increase interest rates?

Because they don't know how to handle a non standard situation. Normally, inflation would be caused by wage rises and consumer spending, and an interest rate rise would make loans more expensive, so cut back on consumer spending, and bsusiness spending, and that would then slow the economy, so there's always a good and bad side to everything they do.

But as you've stated, that's not the case this time, so why the justification for raising rate - there is none, but they'll follow the standard response never the less.

This speculative increase in interest rates being enough to cause the pound to rise in value.

More than likely. Easier to create the illusion of being in control, rathere than to do nothing, and show you're not.

 

[EFLImpudence]

More than likely.

It already has - today.

 

[transam]

afaik one X labour politician/minister (woman) even bought porn films (?) and claimed it on there expenses

forgot her name now , she has been on the Andrew neal late night politics prog a few times since ??

perhaps JD can shed some light on it via a link

 

[Doggit]

It was hubby that brought them whilst they were staying a hotel, and he charged them to the room. Wonder where she was at the time.

 

[IWalkLikeHimaMartian]

Oh dear, doggit has it wrong again.
Jacqui Smith was the MP. (Redditch)
It was her husband who bought the porn films (she says), and it was on her broadband/TV subscription, which she should not have put on expenses.

 

[JohnD]

Now play straight

just to be fair, I'll do that after I've read your posts criticising tax-dodging, expense-looting conservative politicians. Where can I find them?

Will they be next to your posts about broken Conservative manifesto promises?

 

[transam]

just to be fair, I'll do that after I've read your posts criticising tax-dodging, expense-looting conservative politicians. Where can I find them?

tax dodging from whom ever is a disgrace matters not what there politics is or what party they belong to

afaik that brunsen bloke pays no personal tax in the UK ??

then there is that bloke who owns the daily Wail

then there is Corbyn big buddies with that Venezulain bloke who is as corrupt & bent as a 9 bob note plundering his countries resources

corruption / fiddeling blimey take a look at the EU

 

[Roger928]

take a look at the EU

Poor old johnd won't venture there. Apart from defending them.
€990 billion a year, according to a study commissioned by the European Parliament.
Whilst here in the uk hmrc are investigating £1.9 billion tax avoidance by the super rich.
However in 2014-15, the super-rich paid more than £4.3bn in tax.

Its in the guardian..
https://www.theguardian.com/busines...19bn-in-potential-tax-avoidance-by-super-rich

So it must be true.....

 

[Doggit]

ust to be fair, I'll do that after I've read your posts criticising tax-dodging, expense-looting conservative politicians. Where can I find them

If you were paying attention, you'll have noticed that I criticise both parties equally.

 

[IWalkLikeHimaMartian]

If you were paying attention, you'll have noticed that I criticise both parties equally.

I have just demonstrated, yet again, that doggit has a twisted view of reality.
He remembers things the way he wishes they were, rather than actuality.

 

[transam]

??? (ignored)

Economics can be a complicated subject wah har bee. In particular if u do not understand the basics

You may be best advised to read a book on the subject

There was some bloke called Mao who wrote a book on economics. Think he was a chairman of some company ?

might be worth a read ???

 

[SirGalahad]

Well that goes without saying, but we know the economy isn't doing well, so that sort of proves that the way they want to run it, isn't the best.



Sorry EFL, but that a far too simplistic automatic cry from the left. There are those at the top, and those at the bottom, and there is a mass of people in the middle. The Tories don't work for those at the top, and the Labour for all they say, definitely don't work for those at the bottom. The only real rule that applies to this game, is that politicians do and say whatever they think they need to, to get get into power and to stay there, or get back in after the countries got fed up with their inneptitude.

The average salary is now about £26,400 yet politicians earn £74,000 plus expenses up to their arm pits. The so called rich you go on about are the top 1%, so the other 99% sit at varying levels below that, plus that 1% you deride pay over 50% of the tax take, so don't knock them too much. Doctors are on about £70k, and there are more local council heads earning way more than the PM, so what do you call rich, and how do you define the middle group that are also in the same boat. The rich have always got rich no matter who's in power, and they just put their money abroad and did even more fiddling when old Labour were in power. Thatcher lowered the tax rates at the top, and got more tax revenue in because they didn't have to hide it any longer, so should she have kept it up at Labours rates.



No it's not; it's all the people in the middle, added to the so called poor who are happy to work hard that vote the tories in. It's the poor that want to sit on their arses that vote Labour, and the middle classes that haven't shruged off their working class upbringing that vote Labour, and they then get in by the likes of Mandleson and Alistair Campbell, AKA the snobby islington set that think they know how to help the poor run their lives, because they know they can do a better job for them.

People will vote against their own best interests as they can be easily manipulated. You think people are rational actors. Look at in America where Trump supporters will have their life saving healthcare taken away from them if he passes his new health bill.

Chomsky put it best and called it manufactured consent.

As to Trump, well he is a business man and his cabinet is full of business men. What has he passed of note other than shred important regulations. The idea that commercial acumen is what is required is based on a simplistic understanding of the situation.

 

[chris1982]

Assuming it is corect, this is the sort of thing I meant.
As the cause, if true as stated before, is the cost of petrol and clothes (produced abroad) and a higher price because of the value of the pound, and not consumer spending caused by inflationary wage rises, then why does this make it necessary to increase interest rates?

In the 90s economists argued that one should not use monetary policy to fight "imported inflation". I think this is still a consensus. So I doubt that they would increase interest rates based on (current) trends in petrol prices. But I do think that the BoE makes its decsion looking forward. I believe there is some data suggesting that it takes about 2 years for a change in monetary policy to develop its full effect on the economy. So they would increase interest rates if they expect that otherwise inflation would be too high in a year or two.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Ah. It's not just me; read the comments -

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-41278741