Labour isn't working - Thread 7

[TheNuthatch]

A chat thread for those who don't like this Labour government.

The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.

Previous thread
www.mumsnet.com/talk/_chat/5396643-labour-isnt-working-thread-6?utm_campaign=thread&utm_medium=share

The jobs market is awful rn. Huge error from Reeves no raise NI when she did.

30 Year gilts have settle slightly. Not great still at around 5.5%, but better than the 5.7 we saw on Wednesday.

Still listening to Political Currency, both Ed and George think Rayner will stay, more because she is a threat on the backbenches and "better on the inside pissing out than outside pissing in".

Either way its a total shower.

That’s a function of broader global bond markets, not specifically the UK.

I think we are ‘on watch’.

Reeves pushed back the budget to try to take advantage of the time value - anyone who trades options, knows that time value decays the closer you get to expiry…

I actually think she will stay. It will weaken Starmer either way but it does seem that they are all Teflon. Plus then she will owe him so less likely to cause trouble??

I agree he can’t afford to lose her, but but but…. Credibility in the toilet.

Will Rachel Reeves still mess about with stamp duty? The Opposition benches will be howling if the phrase is even mentioned in the budget! Of course RR may implement a backdated rule that any MP who in the last year purchased a seaside home is exempt…

At this stage, what credibility?? Starmer has none, Labour has none, Reeves has none.

That is a very sage post.

I think Starmer will try very hard to keep AR on if there’s any “inadvertent”, “in error” etc in the Standards report. He’ll cling to anything to avoid upsetting the left on the backbenches. He’ll try to play the tough guy against the opposition and the press if he thinks he won’t have to climb down soon after.

But if the report’s unequivocal about lack of care for propriety and for the public standing of ministers, he’ll have no real choice. (I think that’s less likely: she’s a loudmouthed fool but probably not a crook.)

But, as you say, it doesn’t much matter either way for the fortunes of Labour.

Interesting. I like that either way they’ve been hit and even if she stays it’s damaging. I can’t imagine the media rounds without the conveyancers etc got it wrong to hide behind. How would MPs defend it?

I suppose they’ll try with some bumpf.

I am ignorant…what is time value? How does this work?

I admit I do feel it’s a complex tax situation re Rayner, but - there’s no evidence that there’s any compassion for anyone else that has made a mistake in their taxes…

Fwiw I don’t think she evaded the tax on purpose. But that’s not an excuse in her position. And they certainly would not be forgiving if the tories had done such a thing.

She’s only showboated her incompetence, anyone competent would have made sure they were doing the right thing.

And now, because they’ve all defended her and will continue doing so, they look just as bad.

She’s tried to shift blame to advisors / professionals (tbc), when she must have realised quite early on, that she’d made a mistake, by not giving them the correct information.

All of the above leaves everyone to conclude, she’s made a big irretrievable mess.

Even the most sympathetic among us don’t want our economy, our society and our future in the hands of someone not up to the job, no matter how compelling their backstory. Surely?! Or is it just us on this chat who can make rational decisions?

Time value is simply the probability that an options value will increase prior to expiry - in Reeves’s case she is gambling that the bond markets will settle down by 26th November.

Had she called an earlier budget, the time value would have been less. It’s plain to see what she is doing - it could easily backfire however.

Quite. It’s a bit like universities offering places to people who haven’t made the grades, because xyz reasons. Commendable etc. However, they’ve then seen results affected. Shocker. A Cambridge prof even wrote about it. Then left.

Yes, she’s gambling alright. Desperate strategy - good job she fixed those foundations!

Makes sense however each month that passes brings more bad news for Labour and economy so it's a fairly big gamble.

This just came up in Times headline too. So bad and awful for anyone impacted. And poor young people.

@Searching4Alpha Interesting. You're right, it's risky. I think I see a little bit more UK specific than you, rather than just global, but we'll see as time plays out. I hope things settle, for all our sakes.

Yep, solid as a rock 😬

All trust transactions are required to be in the interests of the trustee, which is hard to see in this case. It also transpires that the £650000 valuation given for the house is double that of all neighbouring houses. If this is true, this represents an unforgivable and probably illegal impoverishment of the trustee for her personal benefit. This is far more serious than the stamp duty issue,, if this turns out to be the truth.

So much for the September reset. Phase 2 isn't going very well so far.

Northern Rock? 😜

The civil service is infested with fabians, as is the judiciary. Annoys me that spell check wants to capitalise fabians

I’d have thought a fundamental issue with civil service staff experience is they’re public sector workers who believe the government can run things well, and have chosen that over the private sector and in many cases stayed there and climbed the ladder with no other experience.

Same with most politicians - on the public payroll in one form or another for life.