• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

UK PoliGAF thread of tell me about the rabbits again, Dave.

Nicktendo86

Member
So inflation down to 1.6%, that's six consecutive months of falling CPI which is the longest fall since since 1997. Not sure if deflation would start be become a cconcern? Anyways, cost of living crises line gets weaker by the month...
 
So inflation down to 1.6%, lowest since 1997. Not sure if deflation would start be become a cconcern? Anyways, cost of living crises line gets weaker by the month...

While probable it's difficult to quantify from just the bare inflation number. I mean the price for energy and food might be going up while the prices for rolex' and Rolls Royce are going down.
 

Nicktendo86

Member
While probable it's difficult to quantify from just the bare inflation number. I mean the price for energy and food might be going up while the prices for rolex' and Rolls Royce are going down.
I should have attached BBC link
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/business-27033602

BBC said:
The largest contribution to the fall in the rate came from petrol prices.

The rate of Retail Prices Index (RPI) inflation also fell to 2.5% from 2.7%.

Petrol prices were unchanged between February and March, compared with a rise of 2.2p a litre a year earlier.

A smaller rise in the prices of clothing and footwear, compared with last year, also contributed to the drop in the inflation rate.
 

Volotaire

Member
While probable it's difficult to quantify from just the bare inflation number. I mean the price for energy and food might be going up while the prices for rolex' and Rolls Royce are going down.

I sincerely doubt the price of Rolex cars are included in the CPI, but your point on luxuries still stands.
 
While probable it's difficult to quantify from just the bare inflation number. I mean the price for energy and food might be going up while the prices for rolex' and Rolls Royce are going down.

Slower food price rises (the supermarket price war may actually be real) and stable petrol prices drove the lower inflation figures. If you are going to try and casually discredit good news please put in a modicum of effort.

It's also good news because a few analysts were expecting a lower rate and for us to hitch onto Europe's deflation spiral, but that's probably not going to happen now.

Anyway, there seems to be a perfect mix of fiscal and monetary policy right now that has engendered investment, consumer spending, wage growth and low inflation. What's more is that there are tentative signs that the housing market is beginning to cool down and that the consumer boom has not been built on equity withdrawal as it was in previous years rather a lower savings rate (as opposed to real terms negative savings rates in from 2002-2007, i.e. people going into debt to spunk money on the high street).

All in all economic conditions in the UK are about as good as they get, especially with the indicators for business investment and confidence finally picking up. The current account deficit may drop to below 3% of GDP this year. While that is still higher than one would hope for, it is an improvement.
 

Nicktendo86

Member
Please zomg don't let facts and figures get in the way of housing bubble, consumer credit led fake growth sound bites!

Amazing stuff, thanks as always for your insight.
 
Slower food price rises (the supermarket price war may actually be real) and stable petrol prices drove the lower inflation figures. If you are going to try and casually discredit good news please put in a modicum of effort.

I really wasn't trying to discredit it, with the (later) provided link the numbers speak for themselves, but the bare inflation number is meaningless when discussing 'cost of living crisis'...
 

Volotaire

Member
Jesus Christ, we have issues with equality that need to be addressed, as all countries do, but the most sexist county in the world? Seriously?
Metro UK: Boys’ club Britain: We’re world’s most sexist country, claims UN envoy. http://google.com/newsstand/s/CBIw4vP0rRo

What an incredible survey and study /sarcasm

Just reported: 1.7% wage inflation vs 1.6 inflation.

Unemployment falls from 7.2% to 6.9%

Good figures and a diminishing output gap, dosen't look like a rise in rates is needed yet due to the slack in the labour market and inflation rates falling. it does seem there is disagreement about the amount of slack though.

Governor Mark Carney indicated that spare economic capacity could amount to slightly more than 1.5% of gross domestic product.

Nine days later, MPC colleague Martin Weale estimated excess capacity at 0.9% of GDP.

And a good boost to self-employment figures .

The level of self employment rose by 3.3% to a record-high 4.5 million in the December to February period.
 
Mega unemployment figures. Shame there isn't a PMQs today...

Key points:

Unemployment down by 77k QoQ, 320k YoY.

Employment up 239k QoQ, 691k YoY.

Total wages up by 1.7%. Private sector wage growth up by 2.0%, outstripping inflation pretty handily.

Unemployment rate drops to 6.9% from 7.1% in the previous quarter and from 7.9% last year.

Absolute employment is now 72.6%, approaching pre-crisis levels.

Inactivity drops by 86k QoQ, 104k YoY. Well below pre-crisis levels.

Youth unemployment down to 19.1%, and below 900k.

Overall, a very strong set of figures for the government.

And to top it all off, Ed Balls has been implicated in a minor hit and run incident.
 
I'm curious have the stat-systems and methods changed since pre-crisis? Because I know the German government loves to tout low unemployment numbers, but so many people are counted as employed in comparison to a few years back that direct comparison is often silly. Many people are also employed without being able to live of their wages requiring government assistance.

Disclaimer:
No I am not trying to shit on the numbers I am trying to understand them and put them into perspective.
 

Volotaire

Member
I'm curious have the stat-systems and methods changed since pre-crisis? Because I know the German government loves to tout low unemployment numbers, but so many people are counted as employed in comparison to a few years back that direct comparison is often silly. Many people are also employed without being able to live of their wages requiring government assistance.

Disclaimer:
No I am not trying to shit on the numbers I am trying to understand them and put them into perspective.

Well in 2008, the ONS (Office for National Statistics) became a non-ministerial department to give more credence and validity to their findings (without political inference). As for particular measures, I know they've been adding new measures such as CPIH, but I'd have to look specifically at changes they've made the the measures.

Despite this, the ONS still makes great errors in their estimates in GDP and other macro-economic data once looking at their revisions , so they're still questionable.
 
I'm curious have the stat-systems and methods changed since pre-crisis? Because I know the German government loves to tout low unemployment numbers, but so many people are counted as employed in comparison to a few years back that direct comparison is often silly. Many people are also employed without being able to live of their wages requiring government assistance.

Disclaimer:
No I am not trying to shit on the numbers I am trying to understand them and put them into perspective.

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_357545.pdf

Not any significant changes. The incoming government have put a much larger emphasis on reporting of benefits outside of the headline claimant count. Even those figures are improving though.

The other reason unemployment is still as high as it is in the UK vs elsewhere is that labour market inactivity has dropped to an incredibly low level after the benefit changes. If the government hadn't bothered with benefit changes the unemployment rate would be below 6%. By forcing people off incapacity benefits and retesting them for ESA, a huge number of people have been forced back into the labour market. Additionally the retirement age is going to rise earlier than expected and more people work into their later years, again pushing the inactivity rate down.

The easiest way to make an international comparison is to look at the absolute employment rate (Table 19 in the report I linked) and then subtract the proportion of people working in government supported schemes (tougher to find). In that comparison, the most shocking part is that the absolute employment rate in the US has been falling since 2010 and the only reason unemployment figures are decent is that more people of working age are just leaving the labour market altogether. In northern Europe, the opposite has been happening because many countries have gotten tough on long term unemployment.
 
Watched HIGNFY yesterday, what a joy. Very funny as usual and Farange really did get his ass handed to him. xD

I don't even know why he agreed to go on, of course he was going to get a roasting.

They could have had a field day if they had attacked his policies. Instead they went after his character, accusing him of having a mistress and of sleeping with seven eastern european women in one night and it came across as quite desperate.
 
Well in 2008, the ONS (Office for National Statistics) became a non-ministerial department to give more credence and validity to their findings (without political inference). As for particular measures, I know they've been adding new measures such as CPIH, but I'd have to look specifically at changes they've made the the measures.

Despite this, the ONS still makes great errors in their estimates in GDP and other macro-economic data once looking at their revisions , so they're still questionable.

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_357545.pdf

Not any significant changes. The incoming government have put a much larger emphasis on reporting of benefits outside of the headline claimant count. Even those figures are improving though.

The other reason unemployment is still as high as it is in the UK vs elsewhere is that labour market inactivity has dropped to an incredibly low level after the benefit changes. If the government hadn't bothered with benefit changes the unemployment rate would be below 6%. By forcing people off incapacity benefits and retesting them for ESA, a huge number of people have been forced back into the labour market. Additionally the retirement age is going to rise earlier than expected and more people work into their later years, again pushing the inactivity rate down.

The easiest way to make an international comparison is to look at the absolute employment rate (Table 19 in the report I linked) and then subtract the proportion of people working in government supported schemes (tougher to find). In that comparison, the most shocking part is that the absolute employment rate in the US has been falling since 2010 and the only reason unemployment figures are decent is that more people of working age are just leaving the labour market altogether. In northern Europe, the opposite has been happening because many countries have gotten tough on long term unemployment.

Thank you both.
 

Volotaire

Member
Also some interesting cooperate news. Starbucks is moving their headquarters to the UK from Amsterdam. Their global overall tax contributions will stay neutral at 34% despite paying more in the UK. I've got to say London is the perfect place to expand their operations, we are a coffee loving city! Well that and the coffee market in Europe is apparently growing at a steady rate.
 

8bit

Knows the Score
Also some interesting cooperate news. Starbucks is moving their headquarters to the UK from Amsterdam. Their global overall tax contributions will stay neutral at 34% despite paying more in the UK. I've got to say London is the perfect place to expand their operations, we are a coffee loving city! Well that and the coffee market in Europe is apparently growing at a steady rate.

I wonder if they have special menus in Amsterdam Starbucks? Anyway, I thought it was Zug, Switzerland that was the tax dodging capital of Europe.
 
So in other words now someone else gets screwed over...

The losing countries are those who allow aggressive tax avoidance by offshoring. Luxembourg, Ireland and the Netherlands come to mind. It's no great loss. They brought it on themselves tbh, it was inevitable that the productive side of Europe would fight back. Germany should be watching very closely and make the same moves as this government on aggressive corporate tax avoidance by multinationals.

I wonder if they have special menus in Amsterdam Starbucks? Anyway, I thought it was Zug, Switzerland that was the tax dodging capital of Europe.

The Netherlands have a whole raft of offshoring rules that allow companies to pay basically no tax, a year or so back SCEE were said to be contemplating moving to Amsterdam, but I don't see it happening now with the tougher UK laws in place.

Zug is funny place though, more registered companies than people iirc!
 
The only thing Ed Balls can properly drive is the economy - into the ground AHAHAHAHA.

Another interesting nugget is that full-time employment has made up 81% of the new jobs in the last year.
 
The losing countries are those who allow aggressive tax avoidance by offshoring. Luxembourg, Ireland and the Netherlands come to mind. It's no great loss. They brought it on themselves tbh, it was inevitable that the productive side of Europe would fight back. Germany should be watching very closely and make the same moves as this government on aggressive corporate tax avoidance by multinationals.

I sure hope something will be done, albeit, it's something that should be tacked on EU level.
 

Nicktendo86

Member
The only thing Ed Balls can properly drive is the economy - into the ground AHAHAHAHA.

Another interesting nugget is that full-time employment has made up 81% of the new jobs in the last year.
So the accusation that all the new jobs are zero hour contracts is nonsense then. Read some data before that suggested zero hours were a very small percentage but this helps confirm.
 
I sure hope something will be done, albeit, it's something that should be tacked on EU level.

It won't be because every time the UK (or Germany) tries to get something through Luxembourg, Ireland or the Netherlands veto it. There was a lot of frustration in Westminster a few years ago and I remember that was when the government decided say "fuck it" and go it alone. Which they did and it looks, tentatively, like it's working.

It's amazing that destructive policies like the bonus cap or the transaction tax find their way through the EU, but a clampdown on corporate tax avoidance never materialises...
 
It's amazing that destructive policies like the bonus cap or the transaction tax find their way through the EU, but a clampdown on corporate tax avoidance never materialises...

Yea, well I would like to beg to differ with your choice of words...
Nevertheless it is disappointing that no clampdown has happened or is on the horizon at the moment.
 
It won't be because every time the UK (or Germany) tries to get something through Luxembourg, Ireland or the Netherlands veto it. There was a lot of frustration in Westminster a few years ago and I remember that was when the government decided say "fuck it" and go it alone. Which they did and it looks, tentatively, like it's working.

It's amazing that destructive policies like the bonus cap or the transaction tax find their way through the EU, but a clampdown on corporate tax avoidance never materialises...

They could always go for Enhanced Cooperation (this has been used a few times, recently for the Unified Patent Court).
 

Nicktendo86

Member
Didn't realise the EU parliament in Strasbourg is only used for four days a year. I knew it moved between Brussels and Strasbourg to appease the French but didn't know the breakdown. What a complete and utter fucking waste of money.
 

Volotaire

Member
Didn't realise the EU parliament in Strasbourg is only used for four days a year. I knew it moved between Brussels and Strasbourg to appease the French but didn't know the breakdown. What a complete and utter fucking waste of money.

Apparently a majority are against it (last month figures for MEP's voting against it 429-184).

-The Strasbourg session was agreed by EU governments as part of a protocol attached to the Treaty of Amsterdam and is decided on by the Governments of the EU, not the parliament. Over a million signatures have been collected to call time on Strasbourg, but as yet that’s been to no avail.

But it looks likes even if governments change their mind, as you imply, France still have a veto.

http://labourlist.org/2012/04/what-a-waste-of-money/

N.B. Ignore that the source is from a labour supporter, I've isolated the facts here.
 
First time I've heard that word, unusual.

I think it's an apt descriptor. Fun to say too!

Edit:

It's an American term, IIRC. The only Brits I know who use it are fans of The West Wing!

Yes, I think it is American. I actually heard it on an episode of Archer, (Sea Tunt: Part II) used to describe an underwater research facility built by a billionaire. Never seen an episode of The West Wing.
 
Oh boy Balls unknowingly scratched the side of a BMW while driving and is now offering to pay for the full cost of repairs.

Literally Hitler here.
 
Didn't realise the EU parliament in Strasbourg is only used for four days a year. I knew it moved between Brussels and Strasbourg to appease the French but didn't know the breakdown. What a complete and utter fucking waste of money.
Absolutely.
Apparently a majority are against it (last month figures for MEP's voting against it 429-184).



But it looks likes even if governments change their mind, as you imply, France still have a veto.

http://labourlist.org/2012/04/what-a-waste-of-money/

N.B. Ignore that the source is from a labour supporter, I've isolated the facts here.

Not sure what it would take to have France give up their veto... So utterly silly and none want's it.
 
Oh boy Balls unknowingly scratched the side of a BMW while driving and is now offering to pay for the full cost of repairs.

Literally Hitler here.

Unknowingly ahahahahaha. You can't unknowingly scratch a car unless you're either mad drunk, listening to music SUPER loud or getting a blow job.
 

phisheep

NeoGAF's Chief Barrister
Erhem. Meanwhile back in Strasbourg ...

Didn't realise the EU parliament in Strasbourg is only used for four days a year. I knew it moved between Brussels and Strasbourg to appease the French but didn't know the breakdown. What a complete and utter fucking waste of money.

Well, Strasbourg is still the official seat of the EU Parliament, so I don't see why they shouldn't just stay there rather than hanging onto the Brussels gravy train.

But actually, I rather like the Strasbourg carnival thing. It is an endearing reminder of the triumph of history over day-to-day practicalities, rather like the date(s) of Easter. Plus, anything that gets up the collective noses of MPs of any kind can't be all bad.

Of course, another possibility, given that there is major repair work needed to the Palace of Westminster - and it has been exercising the best that passes for brains in our Parliament how to get it scheduled in - is to temporarily (for about 3-4 years, which is I think the time the repairs are estimated to take) shift the UK House of Commons to Strasbourg.

This would at a stroke:
- put "Britain at the centre of Europe" as everybody except UKIP keeps saying on and off
- being as Strasbourg would be unavailable, stop the EU Parliament boondoggle
- piss off the French, and so be a major foreign policy coup
- Keep the Alsatians happy, they could open up a new business proposition (like for example hosting the Russian Parliament when the Kremlin needs plastering)
- Accelerate the much-needed separation of powers in the UK by making it more difficult for Ministers to try to bully the Commons ...
- ... and therefore accelerate reform of the house of Lords because Ministers would rather stroll there than fly to Strasbourg

By the time it is all over the Executive would be resident in the Lords (and as the Parliament Acts only apply to bills started in the Commons they would no longer have practical application), the Commons would retain legislative control - but probably regret having to come back to London, so might even spend more time in their constituencies, and the EU Parliament will realise that a great boon has been done to them by the UK so might listen a bit more. And France will still be pissed off.

All those in favour, say "aye".

(in the next exciting episode, I shall consider the merits - though there are not many of them - of merging an independent Scotland with Ireland, Wales, Cornwall, Brittany, Catalonia and the Basque Country. Essentially it comes down to better weather for the majority.)
 

Volotaire

Member
Erhem. Meanwhile back in Strasbourg

(in the next exciting episode, I shall consider the merits - though there are not many of them - of merging an independent Scotland with Ireland, Wales, Cornwall, Brittany, Catalonia and the Basque Country. Essentially it comes down to better weather for the majority.)[

A new Angevin Empire? Sounds good to me.

God it still pains me how John (in my opinion) lost it.
 

Nicktendo86

Member
I like the idea of moving parliament, but I would suggest up north or maybe even use the Scottish parliament (if they vote no to independence) for say 1/3 of the year. Would be more symbolic than anything but I think could be a good idea. I dunno, thinking aloud more than anything.
 

phisheep

NeoGAF's Chief Barrister
I like the idea of moving parliament, but I would suggest up north or maybe even use the Scottish parliament (if they vote no to independence) for say 1/3 of the year. Would be more symbolic than anything but I think could be a good idea. I dunno, thinking aloud more than anything.

Me too, but it is much more than symbolic. You should be able to move Parliament fairly easily - and there's any number of Cathedrals/Castles in the UK that could host it. There would be a whole load of moaning about the cost of course, but I suspect that whatever the cost it will be less than the cost of leaving it where it is.
 
Top Bottom