Can someone please pass the following message on to Northants council: live within your means, don't spend too much money, and when you run out of it stop blaming everyone else apart from yourself.
You could say the same to British governments, many British businesses or other organisations and millions of British people.
But the Civil Service has been exposed by "Yes, Minister" which as many connected with politics over the years have observed, was not so much a comedy series as a documentary...
This is like saying you want an investigation into the Stargate under Cheyenne Mountain, because you saw this program on telly...
That program just gives the US Air Force a cover story.
It was originally a movie
Weirdly, if I remember correctly, "Stargate SG-1" (the first TV series) is a continuation of "Stargate" (the film): the characters and backstory are the same, just played by different actors.
They did tweak the canon a bit, but otherwise correct.
(nerd) They actually carried over one actor at least, Daniel, who was the archaeology guy. (/nerd)
But the Civil Service has been exposed by "Yes, Minister" which as many connected with politics over the years have observed, was not so much a comedy series as a documentary...
This is like saying you want an investigation into the Stargate under Cheyenne Mountain, because you saw this program on telly...
That program just gives the US Air Force a cover story.
It was originally a movie
Weirdly, if I remember correctly, "Stargate SG-1" (the first TV series) is a continuation of "Stargate" (the film): the characters and backstory are the same, just played by different actors.
They did tweak the canon a bit, but otherwise correct.
(nerd) They actually carried over one actor at least, Daniel, who was the archaeology guy. (/nerd)
(nerd_and_pedant) No, it was James Spader in the movie and Michael Shanks on the telly. Although they do look similar. (/nerd_and_pedant)
Yawn. It doesn't matter about what MPs think. They can't negotiate with the EU nor can they direct the Government how to negotiate. They can only legislate. If they reject the A50 agreement (if there is one) they get No Deal Brexit. If Leavers control the Government, the only way that MPs can stop them is to bring down the Government - not going to happen.
Sounds like the civil service has something to hide.
Time for an investigation into its forecasts.
Given that the whole of the economics profession near enough said Brexit would harm growth the forecasts are hardly surprising.
But the Treasury forecast a recession after a Leave vote in all scenarios.
And not only was the Treasury wrong in its overall forecast it was wrong quarter after quarter in its details.
Why are you so willing to accept without question Treasury forecasts ?
Why are you so negative to people asking questions ?
it’s obvious that Rees Mogg has no interest in improving future forecasting/economic policy advice.
Does the Treasury ?
Do you think there should be an independent and public enquiry into Treasury forecasts ?
No. Forecasting isn’t particularly accurate whoever does it. But the Brexiteers are deliberately confusing forecasting with other areas of economics that are more useful and based on better research because they want to discredit evidence inconvenient to their agenda.
An analogy would be - your doctor tells you smoking is bad for you, it increases your risk of cancer. But they cannot forecast when you will get cancer or even if you will die of cancer. And if you get hit by a bus tomorrow - that does not mean that smoking is actually fine and their warnings were wrong.
Sounds like the civil service has something to hide.
Time for an investigation into its forecasts.
Given that the whole of the economics profession near enough said Brexit would harm growth the forecasts are hardly surprising.
But the Treasury forecast a recession after a Leave vote in all scenarios.
And not only was the Treasury wrong in its overall forecast it was wrong quarter after quarter in its details.
Why are you so willing to accept without question Treasury forecasts ?
Why are you so negative to people asking questions ?
it’s obvious that Rees Mogg has no interest in improving future forecasting/economic policy advice.
Does the Treasury ?
Do you think there should be an independent and public enquiry into Treasury forecasts ?
No. Forecasting isn’t particularly accurate whoever does it. But the Brexiteers are deliberately confusing forecasting with other areas of economics that are more useful and based on better research because they want to discredit evidence inconvenient to their agenda.
An analogy would be - your doctor tells you smoking is bad for you, it increases your risk of cancer. But they cannot forecast when you will get cancer or even if you will die of cancer. And if you get hit by a bus tomorrow - that does not mean that smoking is actually fine and their warnings were wrong.
There's a difference between being not particularly accurate and complete bollox and the Treasury forecasts were complete bollox. Nor was that the first time Treasury forecasts have been complete bollox either - the 2008 Budget is another example,
Now as Treasury forecasts are important in setting government financial policies they can have a significantly damaging effect on the financial wellbeing of the country if they happen to be complete bollox.
That alone should be reason enough for the failures of Treasury forecasting to be publicly and independently investigated.
Yet it seems you would prefer if questions are not asked and we all 'doff our caps' to anything the Treasury says.
Interesting that for a betting site, so many are prepared to completely ignore the odds when it comes to JRM. He is favourite to be next Tory leader because he is the person most likely to be next Tory leader. It really comes down to IF he stands.
If he does, he will quickly separate from the pack because he is a far superior politician - able and willing to engage in debate, explain his views to the public and because you actually know what he stands for - who can really say what Rudd believes? And, at the end of the day, the only way to deal with Brexit is to actually deliver it. His social views are out of line with current mainstream opinion but I think he will simply and eloquently explain that he has no desire to implement them and the public at large will accept this, because he is being honest.
He is spot on with his criticism of the Treasury - they are clearly politicised and every forecast they made has been hopelessly wrong. They are exploiting a vacuum of leadership in No 10.
Sooner or later the Leavers will have to move on May if they want a real Brexit, when they do it will be the person who actually was consistent in his position who will get the credit. In the end, especially in the current climate, people love a conviction politician. JRM is favourite for good reason.
i think he is too right wing to do well, but then I thought Corbyn was too left wing to do well.
If Labour had the Tory method of electing a leader whereby all but the last two are filtered out by MPs, Corbyn would not have become leader. Mogg is not the person most likely to become Tory leader because although he is popular with members, he has insufficient support with Tory MPs and they will filer him out of the final two.
And Corbyn did not do well. He lost a third election for Labour in a row.
He did better than Kinnock & Gaitskell in that he denied the Tories an overall majority.
There's a difference between being not particularly accurate and complete bollox and the Treasury forecasts were complete bollox. Nor was that the first time Treasury forecasts have been complete bollox either - the 2008 Budget is another example,
Now as Treasury forecasts are important in setting government financial policies they can have a significantly damaging effect on the financial wellbeing of the country if they happen to be complete bollox.
That alone should be reason enough for the failures of Treasury forecasting to be publicly and independently investigated.
Yet it seems you would prefer if questions are not asked and we all 'doff our caps' to anything the Treasury says.
I'm with @Casino_Royale on this. I think the Treasury diligently, and largely impartially, produces economic forecasts. Sure, unconscious bias plays a role, but let's not forget 1, timing is a bitch; 2, external factors are hard to predict.
OK, timing. I think the UK economy is heading for a hard recession at some point in the next three years as the savings rate normalises. I can't tell you when this will happen, but when it does it will be a self-reinforcing process: a slowing economy will call cause people to up their savings, which will further slow the economy. When will this happen? No idea. But, mark my words, this will happen.
Regarding external factors, let's take something non-UK focused. The Federal, the US Treasury, and most economic commentators underestimated US performance in the first half of the 2010s. Was it because they were unduly negative about US prospects? Not really: they got one thing wrong - but it was a big thing. They didn't realise that technology would change US oil production, (which in turn would lower the global oil price). This accounts for slightly more that all US economic outperformance relative to forecasts.
The Treasury's Brexit forecast assumed (wrongly) that confidence would fall, and that investment (gross capital formation) would decline sharply, precipitating a recession. (Of course, said recession would drive feedback loops like a rising savings rate.) Investment has not fallen. Instead, the falling pound has resulted in manufacturing investment actually rising, albeit only marginally, while residential and commercial construction has accelerated.
With the correct government policies, we can probably encourage investment - particularly in construction - to remain at elevated levels. With a sensibly negotiated Brexit, we can probably keep manufacturing investment up.
However, to come back to my timing point, we are still running with a saving rate well below equilibrium level. There is not an unlimited amount of money that Brits can borrow from abroad to pay for imported iPhones, and at some point we will have to have saving at an above equilibrium level (especially given demographic challenges). That will be a painful transition.
O/t, but last night (my time) I was talking to a Thai businessman.....with several businesses world wide...... who asked me why Brexit. I gave me my opinion and asked hime had the vote made a diffeence to his view of Britain (he has some interests in UK). The reply was interesting. He said it didn't make a lot of difference to him financially but it did make the UK a less desirable country in which to invest, because we would no longer be part of the EU and that in his eyes coming out of the EU diminished the UK.
I'm with @Casino_Royale on this. I think the Treasury diligently, and largely impartially, produces economic forecasts. Sure, unconscious bias plays a role, but let's not forget 1, timing is a bitch; 2, external factors are hard to predict.
Regarding external factors, let's take something non-UK focused. The Federal, the US Treasury, and most economic commentators underestimated US performance in the first half of the 2010s. Was it because they were unduly negative about US prospects? Not really: they got one thing wrong - but it was a big thing. They didn't realise that technology would change US oil production, (which in turn would lower the global oil price). This accounts for slightly more that all US economic outperformance relative to forecasts.
The Treasury's Brexit forecast assumed (wrongly) that confidence would fall, and that investment (gross capital formation) would decline sharply, precipitating a recession. (Of course, said recession would drive feedback loops like a rising savings rate.) Investment has not fallen. Instead, the falling pound has resulted in manufacturing investment actually rising, albeit only marginally, while residential and commercial construction has accelerated.
With the correct government policies, we can probably encourage investment - particularly in construction - to remain at elevated levels. With a sensibly negotiated Brexit, we can probably keep manufacturing investment up.
However, to come back to my timing point, we are still running with a saving rate well below equilibrium level. There is not an unlimited amount of money that Brits can borrow from abroad to pay for imported iPhones, and at some point we will have to have saving at an above equilibrium level (especially given demographic challenges). That will be a painful transition.
I agree with you about the economy, the twenty years of Osbrowne over-consumption will need to be 'repaid'.
Still the process has begun - the UK trade deficit for 2017 should be the lowest as a percentage of GDP for nearly twenty years - and if we can maintain some level of growth during the next few years while the economy rebalances it will be an achievement.
As to the Treasury forecasts for a Leave vote what exposes them is that they produced two forecasts - both forecasting four quarter recessions with further risks of things being even worse.
Now when you make a single forecast its inevitable that reality will turn out different. But when you give a range of forecasts and reality is off on a differnet page to what you forecast then you really have bolloxed it.
As you say the Treasury forecasts were based upon certain assumptions but why did they make those assumptions ? Incompetence or bias are two possible answers and the only way for it to be discovered is for it to be independently and publicly investigated.
I'm with @Casino_Royale on this. I think the Treasury diligently, and largely impartially, produces economic forecasts. Sure, unconscious bias plays a role, but let's not forget 1, timing is a bitch; 2, external factors are hard to predict.
OK, timing. I think the UK economy is heading for a hard recession at some point in the next three years as the savings rate normalises. I can't tell you when this will happen, but when it does it will be a self-reinforcing process: a slowing economy will call cause people to up their savings, which will further slow the economy. When will this happen? No idea. But, mark my words, this will happen.
Regarding external factors, let's take something non-UK focused. The Federal, the US Treasury, and most economic commentators underestimated US performance in the first half of the 2010s. Was it because they were unduly negative about US prospects? Not really: they got one thing wrong - but it was a big thing. They didn't realise that technology would change US oil production, (which in turn would lower the global oil price). This accounts for slightly more that all US economic outperformance relative to forecasts.
The Treasury's Brexit forecast assumed (wrongly) that confidence would fall, and that investment (gross capital formation) would decline sharply, precipitating a recession. (Of course, said recession would drive feedback loops like a rising savings rate.) Investment has not fallen. Instead, the falling pound has resulted in manufacturing investment actually rising, albeit only marginally, while residential and commercial construction has accelerated.
With the correct government policies, we can probably encourage investment - particularly in construction - to remain at elevated levels. With a sensibly negotiated Brexit, we can probably keep manufacturing investment up.
However, to come back to my timing point, we are still running with a saving rate well below equilibrium level. There is not an unlimited amount of money that Brits can borrow from abroad to pay for imported iPhones, and at some point we will have to have saving at an above equilibrium level (especially given demographic challenges). That will be a painful transition.
Increased saving will reduce consumption which forms an excessively large part of our GDP at present but this doesn’t mean that a recession is inevitable. A reduction in consumption can be offset by an increase in production and an improvement in our balance of payments. Whether this will be enough only time will tell. I am hopeful that investment and increased production will offset the reduction in consumption, just as it did in 2017.
Comments
And not only was the Treasury wrong in its overall forecast it was wrong quarter after quarter in its details.
Why are you so willing to accept without question Treasury forecasts ?
Why are you so negative to people asking questions ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZR64EF3OpA
A Final Examination"
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/democracy/reports/2017/11/01/441926/voter-trends-in-2016/
They actually carried over one actor at least, Daniel, who was the archaeology guy.
(/nerd)
No, it was James Spader in the movie and Michael Shanks on the telly. Although they do look similar.
(/nerd_and_pedant)
https://twitter.com/pm4eastren/status/959909038480855046
Do you think there should be an independent and public enquiry into Treasury forecasts ?
Forecasting isn’t particularly accurate whoever does it.
But the Brexiteers are deliberately confusing forecasting with other areas of economics that are more useful and based on better research because they want to discredit evidence inconvenient to their agenda.
This was predictable: https://mainlymacro.blogspot.co.uk/2017/02/how-brexit-advocates-intend-to-smear.html?m=1
An analogy would be - your doctor tells you smoking is bad for you, it increases your risk of cancer.
But they cannot forecast when you will get cancer or even if you will die of cancer. And if you get hit by a bus tomorrow - that does not mean that smoking is actually fine and their warnings were wrong.
Now as Treasury forecasts are important in setting government financial policies they can have a significantly damaging effect on the financial wellbeing of the country if they happen to be complete bollox.
That alone should be reason enough for the failures of Treasury forecasting to be publicly and independently investigated.
Yet it seems you would prefer if questions are not asked and we all 'doff our caps' to anything the Treasury says.
I seem to remember reading many times that there was going to be a huge anti-Trump Latino turnout.
OK, timing. I think the UK economy is heading for a hard recession at some point in the next three years as the savings rate normalises. I can't tell you when this will happen, but when it does it will be a self-reinforcing process: a slowing economy will call cause people to up their savings, which will further slow the economy. When will this happen? No idea. But, mark my words, this will happen.
Regarding external factors, let's take something non-UK focused. The Federal, the US Treasury, and most economic commentators underestimated US performance in the first half of the 2010s. Was it because they were unduly negative about US prospects? Not really: they got one thing wrong - but it was a big thing. They didn't realise that technology would change US oil production, (which in turn would lower the global oil price). This accounts for slightly more that all US economic outperformance relative to forecasts.
The Treasury's Brexit forecast assumed (wrongly) that confidence would fall, and that investment (gross capital formation) would decline sharply, precipitating a recession. (Of course, said recession would drive feedback loops like a rising savings rate.) Investment has not fallen. Instead, the falling pound has resulted in manufacturing investment actually rising, albeit only marginally, while residential and commercial construction has accelerated.
With the correct government policies, we can probably encourage investment - particularly in construction - to remain at elevated levels. With a sensibly negotiated Brexit, we can probably keep manufacturing investment up.
However, to come back to my timing point, we are still running with a saving rate well below equilibrium level. There is not an unlimited amount of money that Brits can borrow from abroad to pay for imported iPhones, and at some point we will have to have saving at an above equilibrium level (especially given demographic challenges). That will be a painful transition.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/02/03/thousands-motorists-unwittingly-driving-around-without-valid/
This bloke like DM'ed me on twitter and said he could get me a great rate on car insurance...he knows a bloke who knows a bloke....
Its the modern equivalent of the not at all dodgy bloke down the pub with genuine definitely not nicked car stereos.
The reply was interesting. He said it didn't make a lot of difference to him financially but it did make the UK a less desirable country in which to invest, because we would no longer be part of the EU and that in his eyes coming out of the EU diminished the UK.
He's in the fashion industry.
Still the process has begun - the UK trade deficit for 2017 should be the lowest as a percentage of GDP for nearly twenty years - and if we can maintain some level of growth during the next few years while the economy rebalances it will be an achievement.
As to the Treasury forecasts for a Leave vote what exposes them is that they produced two forecasts - both forecasting four quarter recessions with further risks of things being even worse.
Now when you make a single forecast its inevitable that reality will turn out different. But when you give a range of forecasts and reality is off on a differnet page to what you forecast then you really have bolloxed it.
As you say the Treasury forecasts were based upon certain assumptions but why did they make those assumptions ? Incompetence or bias are two possible answers and the only way for it to be discovered is for it to be independently and publicly investigated.