|
Post by aargauer on Oct 7, 2022 14:10:18 GMT
This, if borne out by repeated polling and the election result, discredits libertarian economics for generations. The party will go nowhere near it for decades. Not sure running big budget deficits is libertarian, and even if it was, it renders it unpopular, not discredited. Most libertarians I know would favour reducing the debt, not increasing it...
|
|
|
Post by woollyliberal on Oct 7, 2022 14:17:44 GMT
This, if borne out by repeated polling and the election result, discredits libertarian economics for generations. The party will go nowhere near it for decades. Not sure running big budget deficits is libertarian, and even if it was, it renders it unpopular, not discredited. Most libertarians I know would favour reducing the debt, not increasing it... It may be a bit cynical, but Libertarian seems to be used for "I want what I want and to hell with the consequences". In the case of Libertarian Tories what they want is to pay less tax. The consequences is a bigger budget deficit but to hell with it. Someone else will have to pay that back. It would seem that running big budget deficits is very much libertarian in its modern guise.
|
|
|
Post by aargauer on Oct 7, 2022 14:26:28 GMT
Not sure running big budget deficits is libertarian, and even if it was, it renders it unpopular, not discredited. Most libertarians I know would favour reducing the debt, not increasing it... It may be a bit cynical, but Libertarian seems to be used for "I want what I want and to hell with the consequences". In the case of Libertarian Tories what they want is to pay less tax. The consequences is a bigger budget deficit but to hell with it. Someone else will have to pay that back. It would seem that running big budget deficits is very much libertarian in its modern guise. I think that's a bit unfair. The core belief is shrinking the size of the state in both spending and taxation, as well as having a broadly laissez faire attitude to social matters. You can argue that's not a good idea, but it is not inherently unworkable, like say communism is. Truss's actions are positively Keynesian (if one accepts there is a recession coming, which is not a particularly controversial opinion). Not an economic school of thought libertarians typically follow. It might attract self-interested people (although so does e.g. socialism), but in and of itself is not "I want what I want and to hell with the consequences".
|
|
timmullen1
Labour
Closing account as BossMan declines to respond to messages seeking support.
Posts: 11,823
|
Post by timmullen1 on Oct 10, 2022 16:03:41 GMT
|
|
|
Post by bigfatron on Oct 10, 2022 18:32:19 GMT
It may be a bit cynical, but Libertarian seems to be used for "I want what I want and to hell with the consequences". In the case of Libertarian Tories what they want is to pay less tax. The consequences is a bigger budget deficit but to hell with it. Someone else will have to pay that back. It would seem that running big budget deficits is very much libertarian in its modern guise. I think that's a bit unfair. The core belief is shrinking the size of the state in both spending and taxation, as well as having a broadly laissez faire attitude to social matters. You can argue that's not a good idea, but it is not inherently unworkable, like say communism is. Truss's actions are positively Keynesian (if one accepts there is a recession coming, which is not a particularly controversial opinion). Not an economic school of thought libertarians typically follow. It might attract self-interested people (although so does e.g. socialism), but in and of itself is not "I want what I want and to hell with the consequences". Sorry, Truss is not at all Keynesian; the whole point of Keynesian economics was that at the low point in the cycle the government should spend in ways that encourage domestic consumption (whether through investment spending or current spending). It is well-established that the wealthy are the segment of society that will spend the lowest proportion of any additional income on domestic consumption, being the most likely to save it and also the most likely to spend what they do spend on imports. Truss has therefore chosen to specifically favour the segment of society that is the least effective from a Keynesian perspective. Tax cuts for the wealthy inspire a messianic belief, both in the US and here, with a segment of the right-wing; in the US it is because the right is bought and paid for by the hyper-rich, I am less clear why this faith-based economics has any adherents over here...
|
|
|
Post by aargauer on Oct 10, 2022 19:02:17 GMT
I think that's a bit unfair. The core belief is shrinking the size of the state in both spending and taxation, as well as having a broadly laissez faire attitude to social matters. You can argue that's not a good idea, but it is not inherently unworkable, like say communism is. Truss's actions are positively Keynesian (if one accepts there is a recession coming, which is not a particularly controversial opinion). Not an economic school of thought libertarians typically follow. It might attract self-interested people (although so does e.g. socialism), but in and of itself is not "I want what I want and to hell with the consequences". Sorry, Truss is not at all Keynesian; the whole point of Keynesian economics was that at the low point in the cycle the government should spend in ways that encourage domestic consumption (whether through investment spending or current spending). It is well-established that the wealthy are the segment of society that will spend the lowest proportion of any additional income on domestic consumption, being the most likely to save it and also the most likely to spend what they do spend on imports. Truss has therefore chosen to specifically favour the segment of society that is the least effective from a Keynesian perspective. Tax cuts for the wealthy inspire a messianic belief, both in the US and here, with a segment of the right-wing; in the US it is because the right is bought and paid for by the hyper-rich, I am less clear why this faith-based economics has any adherents over here... That just renders the programme less effective Keynesianism, rather than not Keynesianism.
|
|
|
Post by bigfatron on Oct 10, 2022 19:06:29 GMT
Sorry, Truss is not at all Keynesian; the whole point of Keynesian economics was that at the low point in the cycle the government should spend in ways that encourage domestic consumption (whether through investment spending or current spending). It is well-established that the wealthy are the segment of society that will spend the lowest proportion of any additional income on domestic consumption, being the most likely to save it and also the most likely to spend what they do spend on imports. Truss has therefore chosen to specifically favour the segment of society that is the least effective from a Keynesian perspective. Tax cuts for the wealthy inspire a messianic belief, both in the US and here, with a segment of the right-wing; in the US it is because the right is bought and paid for by the hyper-rich, I am less clear why this faith-based economics has any adherents over here... That just renders the programme less effective Keynesianism, rather than not Keynesianism. No - because Keynes did not advocate splurging money in ways that produced a multiplier effect of close to or below one, which is what truss is doing here. Truss' action in reducing higher rate tax was driven by faith, not solid economic theory. It's like describing driving as 'less effective flying' on the basis that you are moving in a vehicle but just haven't got off the ground yet....
|
|
Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 15,282
|
Post by Sibboleth on Oct 10, 2022 19:20:15 GMT
Sorry, Truss is not at all Keynesian Indeed, she's an actual Monetarist. In 2022.
|
|
iain
Lib Dem
Posts: 10,707
|
Post by iain on Oct 12, 2022 10:45:00 GMT
I’d guess we see both Lib Dem and Tory down quite a bit at Labour’s expense here. Not sure what the 42 seats polled are.
|
|
clyde1998
SNP
Green (E&W) member; SNP supporter
Posts: 1,765
|
Post by clyde1998 on Oct 12, 2022 10:57:38 GMT
I’d guess we see both Lib Dem and Tory down quite a bit at Labour’s expense here. Not sure what the 42 seats polled are. Finally! I'd love for other pollster to do some trackers in sub-national areas; would give quite a bit more of a clearer picture of the different trends across the country. They've given the 2019 vote shares, so I reckon I could work out what 42 seats they've polled before they publish the list. Could we see the Conservatives in third here? I imagine the poll will end up showing Labour ahead in these seats.
|
|
jamie
Top Poster
Posts: 6,842
|
Post by jamie on Oct 12, 2022 12:11:47 GMT
Prediction: Lab - 39% Con - 28% LD - 25% Green - 5% Reform - 2%
|
|
iain
Lib Dem
Posts: 10,707
|
Post by iain on Oct 12, 2022 12:52:58 GMT
Prediction: Lab - 39% Con - 28% LD - 25% Green - 5% Reform - 2% Given the Labour bounce we’ve seen, partly at the Lib Dems’ expense, and the lack of tactical voting that normally comes along with these polls, I’d expect us to be closer to 15% than 25% unfortunately.
|
|
jamie
Top Poster
Posts: 6,842
|
Post by jamie on Oct 12, 2022 12:56:33 GMT
Given the Labour bounce we’ve seen, partly at the Lib Dems’ expense, and the lack of tactical voting that normally comes along with these polls, I’d expect us to be closer to 15% than 25% unfortunately. Judging by this tweet you're probably right.
|
|
|
Post by woollyliberal on Oct 12, 2022 13:53:38 GMT
Prediction: Lab - 39% Con - 28% LD - 25% Green - 5% Reform - 2% Given the Labour bounce we’ve seen, partly at the Lib Dems’ expense, and the lack of tactical voting that normally comes along with these polls, I’d expect us to be closer to 15% than 25% unfortunately. What makes you so pessimistic? I'd have thought the Lib Dems would be doing well in their Tory marginals and the losses would come in labour vs tory seats. The Lab vs Con seats vastly outnumber Con vs LD leading to a LD drop in national polls.
|
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,283
|
Post by YL on Oct 12, 2022 15:09:47 GMT
Here is their version of the "Blue Wall":
Many of them are seats you'd expect to vote Lib Dem before they voted Labour, but not all: it includes Filton & Bradley Stoke, the MK seats, Wycombe, etc.
|
|
clyde1998
SNP
Green (E&W) member; SNP supporter
Posts: 1,765
|
Post by clyde1998 on Oct 12, 2022 15:16:11 GMT
The definition they're using for 'Blue Wall' is: - Situated in the South of England (Eastern England, London, South East or South West)
- Voted Conservative in 2015, 2017, & 2019
- >25% of adults have a degree
- Conservative majority <15k over Lib Dems OR <10k over Labour
- 2016 Remain vote >42.5%
I don't see why there's a threshold for the size of the majority is needed (other than reducing the amount of seats to poll) and why its different depending on who's second in the seat (also doing it by raw vote is a bit strange given differential turnouts - majority share would be better). I make the 42 seats: - Bournemouth East
- Cambridgeshire South
- Cambridgeshire South East
- Chelsea and Fulham
- Cheltenham
- Chingford and Woodford Green
- Chippenham
- Chipping Barnet
- Cities of London and Westminster
- Colchester
- Dorset West
- Esher and Walton
- Filton and Bradley Stoke
- Finchley and Golders Green
- Guildford
- Harrow East
- Hendon
- Henley
- Hitchin and Harpenden
- Lewes
- Milton Keynes North
- Milton Keynes South
- Mole Valley
- Reading West
- Romsey and Southampton North
- St Ives
- Surrey Heath
- Surrey South West
- Sutton and Cheam
- Taunton Deane
- Thornbury and Yate
- Totnes
- Truro and Falmouth
- Tunbridge Wells
- Uxbridge and South Ruislip
- Wantage
- Watford
- Wells
- Wimbledon
- Winchester
- Wokingham
- Wycombe
|
|
iain
Lib Dem
Posts: 10,707
|
Post by iain on Oct 12, 2022 15:18:40 GMT
Given the Labour bounce we’ve seen, partly at the Lib Dems’ expense, and the lack of tactical voting that normally comes along with these polls, I’d expect us to be closer to 15% than 25% unfortunately. What makes you so pessimistic? I'd have thought the Lib Dems would be doing well in their Tory marginals and the losses would come in labour vs tory seats. The Lab vs Con seats vastly outnumber Con vs LD leading to a LD drop in national polls. For the reasons I set out in the post quoted. I also imagine we’d do very well if this was an election, but it isn’t, it’s a poll.
|
|
iain
Lib Dem
Posts: 10,707
|
Post by iain on Oct 12, 2022 15:26:55 GMT
The definition they're using for 'Blue Wall' is: - Situated in the South of England (Eastern England, London, South East or South West)
- Voted Conservative in 2015, 2017, & 2019
- >25% of adults have a degree
- Conservative majority <15k over Lib Dems OR <10k over Labour
- 2016 Remain vote >42.5%
I don't see why there's a threshold for the size of the majority is needed (other than reducing the amount of seats to poll) and why its different depending on who's second in the seat (also doing it by raw vote is a bit strange given differential turnouts - majority share would be better). I make the 42 seats: - Bournemouth East
- Cambridgeshire South
- Cambridgeshire South West
- Chelsea and Fulham
- Cheltenham
- Chingford and Woodford Green
- Chippenham
- Chipping Barnet
- Cities of London and Westminster
- Colchester
- Dorset West
- Esher and Walton
- Filton and Bradley Stoke
- Finchley and Golders Green
- Guildford
- Harrow East
- Hendon
- Henley
- Hitchin and Harpenden
- Lewes
- Milton Keynes North
- Milton Keynes South
- Mole Valley
- Reading West
- Romsey and Southampton North
- St Ives
- Surrey Heath
- Surrey South West
- Sutton and Cheam
- Taunton Deane
- Thornbury and Yate
- Totnes
- Truro and Falmouth
- Tunbridge Wells
- Uxbridge and South Ruislip
- Wantage
- Watford
- Wells
- Wimbledon
- Winchester
- Wokingham
- Wycombe
So that's 28 Lib Dem facing and 14 Labour facing seats (though Finchley, Cities and Chelsea & Fulham are de facto Labour facing).
|
|
jamie
Top Poster
Posts: 6,842
|
Post by jamie on Oct 12, 2022 15:33:05 GMT
So somewhere that voted 57.4% Leave is considered Blue Wall?
Ok.
|
|
|
Post by bjornhattan on Oct 12, 2022 15:42:03 GMT
So somewhere that voted 57.4% Leave is considered Blue Wall? Ok. The degree qualification is also a little odd. South Swindon has a narrow majority, was only around 51-52% Leave - but misses out because only 24.7% of adults there are graduates. Or rather, 24.7% were graduates in 2011; that figure has almost certainly risen to over 25% now!
|
|