[zarzavat]

The UK has very unstable economic policy. Despite one party being in charge for the last 12 years, each prime minister has wrought radically different economic policies. Under Cameron was austerity, services were cut and much pain was endured to “get the deficit down”. Under Johnson we had an investment-based economic policy, and then under Truss we are seeing tax cuts for the rich funded by borrowing which is an economic policy that I’m not sure has a name because it’s so stupid (Trussonomics?).

Already there are some calls from within the Conservative party to remove Truss and she has only been in the job for a matter of weeks.

All this time wages and services have suffered, because the political class is obsessed with ideology over the boring work of governance. I realise this is not a unique phenomenon around the world, but what seems to set apart the political class in the UK is the heady mix of egoism and delusion, that blinds them to their own incompetence until they are removed and someone else is instated.

[wucaworld]

Thanks for the insight. In Canada, things have been more consistent politically at least. Good point that the same party in power can still result in diverging directions. I don’t feel this as much despite changes in parties at the federal and provincial level over the last dozen years.

E.g. federally, big changes were relaxation of immigration, govt support for lower income earners and cannabis legalization. Provincially (Ontario) govt services like schools and healthcare are being starved, and privatization of previously public services is on the agenda.

Perhaps the water is being boiled slower than I can feel :)

[jleyank]

Provincial leadership, while it’s shown sparks of both good and bad policy during covid, is conservative. Federal leadership is a liberal minority. They have been at odds at times, sometimes significantly.

[mytailorisrich]

> Truss we are seeing tax cuts for the rich funded by borrowing which is an economic policy that I’m not sure has a name because it’s so stupid

So far the government has announced income tax and NI reduction for everyone, removal of the 45% income tax rate, and cancellation of a plan corporation tax increase.

Only the removal of the 45% income tax rate is targeted at the rich and I suspect that this might be the cheapest of the 3 measures, but indeed symbolically it does not look that good.

[throwawaylinux]

> under Truss we are seeing tax cuts for the rich funded by borrowing

Any reduction in government income is funded by borrowing for a budget that is not in surplus, which seems to be the default state of things these days.

And what's stupid about government reducing income and borrowing in a downturn?

[cool_dude85]

>And what's stupid about government reducing income and borrowing in a downturn?

Government finances are not like your household's, reducing spending is exactly the opposite thing the government should do in a recession.

[wucaworld]

That is not correct.

Spending is the appropriate response when faced with a demand driven recession. This is a supply driven recession and reducing govt demand may not be a bad idea.

[throwawaylinux]

I don't know what that has to do with what I wrote though.

Reducing revenue is also one of those things that conventional wisdom says a government "should do" during a recession, so I'm asking why it was stupid.