- This topic has 852 replies, 34 voices, and was last updated 3 years, 6 months ago by
.
- Posts
Lockdowns are possibly only a so so factor in inflation with pent up demand as tbe shackles are loosened
Sweden didn’t lockdown but it’s inflation was 6.4% in April. Much in line with ours at that stage
Across Europe it’s an issue but labour demand is a probably bigger issue here driving it higher
If you thats the case why the panic in a couple of grand extra year for energy , also there are 5% deposits out there , have been for a few years , Clive the **** is going to hit the fan come 2023/2024 , recessions happen and housing price crashes happen , even with good PM in charge , we have Boris …Boris spending all his time trying to save his own ass , do not think we are going into recession ?
5% deposit accounts ? Where?
You can borrow at less than that so that makes no sense at all
“This Inflation is not down to printing money otherwise we would have had high inflation over the past 10 years as a result of the QE.”
It is different now. Previously QE was just a paper exercise in the bond markets.
Furlough – a different name for QE – put money into the pockets of real people but they had nowhere to spend it.
Then inflation happened. Whoever would have guessed?!
“Eat out to help out.”
I wonder how many took any notice of that?
Pocketed furlough money as insurance against the inevitable hard times coming – now arrived – more likely, IMO.
I am "The Horse Racing Punter" on Facebook
https://mobile.twitter.com/Ian_Davies_
https://www.facebook.com/ThePointtoPointNHandFlatracingpunter/
It's the "Millwall FC" of Point broadcasts: "No One Likes Us - We Don't Care"Can’t agree cork. Furlough was not 100% of salaries and was aimed at the lower paid. The idea they were just stacking it up to go on spending sprees doesn’t make sense. Most bloody well struggled losing 20% of income.
Also that is not reflected in the spending patterns since lockdown. I am pretty certain there was no great surge
“Pocketed furlough money…”
Everyone I know who was put on furlough used that money for essentials- mortgage/rent, food and bills.
Come off it, Clive. You are not telling me only the low paid got furlough?
This is complete denial. The idea that lockdown would have no serious economic consequences is simply not credible.
Then there are all the other consequences – but that is a whole separate subject.
But to bring it back to Starmer. He opposed “Freedom Day” last summer and I have no doubt he would have locked down hard over omicron if he had been PM, rather like Sturgeon and Drakeford did (for absolutely no benefit).
He cannot exploit the cost of living crisis because it is largely a cost of lockdown crisis – and he is just as responsible for it as Johnson.
Lockdown is a different issue to furlough. And I never said only the low paid received it I said it was generally the lower incomes
You are blaming furlough for inflation on what basis? The tenuous “government printing money” ? How can it drive inflation when it delivered substantially smaller incomes for a big section of t(e population?
Where did I say that lockdown would not have consequences?
The fact is we had lockdown and what was the alternative to furlough? Just throw people on the street?
And this ludicrous “pocketing furlough money” crap. What on earth do people think the furloughed were living on?
“… he is just as responsible for it as Johnson.“
No he isn’t. Policy decisions are down to the government alone.
You keep saying that inflation is “largely” down to the lockdown
So why is Sweden suffering the same?
That has to be explained?
Also large parts of the usa barely lockdowned at all and their inflation is now 8.5%
And why is France, that lockdowned harder than us, having an inflation rate half ours?
The recent surge in multi-decade high inflation rates globally (eg. UK = 9%, US = 8.6%) was examined by an expert panel which concluded as follows:
“…Alessandra Bonfiglioli (Queen Mary University of London) summarises the consensus view: “The supply-chain crisis affecting most rich countries, as well as the surge in energy prices in the whole of Europe, has certainly played a prominent role. In the case of the UK this was aggravated by the increase in import costs and the shortages of workers from the EU, many of which had returned to their home countries during the lockdowns and were unable/unwilling to come back due to visa issues.” James Smith (Resolution Foundation) concurs: “The biggest driver of inflation at the moment are conditions in global goods markets. In turn, the key driver there has been the normalisation in commodity prices. Issues in global supply chains have exacerbated this.” …
(source: voxeu.org “Surging inflation in the UK”)
BTW, for a fun and mind-boggling read, here’s a link to an article on Zimbabwe’s 80 billion percent rate of inflation and their printing of 100-trillion-dollar-notes which couldn’t even buy a loaf of bread!
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2016/may/14/zimbabwe-trillion-dollar-note-hyerinflation-investment
Sweden is nowhere near as badly off as we are, by several measures. Because that country did not go along with the groupthink panic.
“The fact is we had lockdown and what was the alternative to furlough? Just throw people on the street?”
No, the alternative was not to panic and implement an insane policy which was always going to do far more harm than good. That is not after timing. Plenty of people said it at the time but very few people wanted to listen.
The government already had a detailed plan to deal with a pandemic in place. This envisaged 250,000 deaths in just four months (covid, even if you believe the official figures, killed fewer in two years). This plan had nothing about lockdowns, masks, or social distancing – and certainly contained nothing about closing down businesses. It was about keeping society going while protecting the vulnerable. Which is all you can do. The idea that lockdowns can stop the spread of a respiratory virus is unscientific nonsense.
Why was this detailed plan thrown out in favour of an untried, untested and uncosted policy? A policy which aside from the economic damage (which is at least fixable) had done huge damage to society, particularly to children. It also affected the poor far more than the wealthy. The sort of people Starmer is supposed to care about.
Turkmen. That’s pretty well it. I was very marginally for brexit and there are labour shortages elsewhere too but without doubt we have lost loads of the workforce in certain key sectors. It’s not good and not been handled at all well. Instead the odious priti Patel has been obsessed about migrants
Cork. You are all over the place. I’m talking about the Swedish inflation rate which is high despite no lockdown. Their relative prosperity has nothing to do with it
I thought lockdown was overdone. But that’s different to blaming furlough for economic ills. I don’t see the connection at all and fwiw ive not seen anything from any mainstream economists
What you are suggesting in the third para is very close to what Sweden did.
Still got 8.5% inflation
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.