@LoftusSteve Patient long term investment actually doesn't involve selling assets to consume so it will only disincentivise speculative higher frequency asset disposals, which are largely unproductive.
English
Jamie Smith
4.4K posts
Jamie Smith
@JGS952
30, Physicist, Engineer, amateur economist. Constantly in a superposition of disappointment and pride with the world.
Hampshire, UK Katılım Ekim 2011
2.1K Takip Edilen245 Takipçiler
OK I take it back. I thought Streeting might be the least bad option but this is moronic. Dangerously moronic.
CGT is less because there's an element of risk. This would be the death of UK investment.
Steven Swinford@Steven_Swinford
Wes Streeting has this morning set out his tax plans - specifically bringing capital gains tax into line with income tax He says that the current system is unfair because it penalises work Higher or additional rate taxpayers will pay 24% on gains in the current financial year. Streeting said that the rates should mirror income tax bands - so 40% for higher rate taxpayers and 45% for additional rate taxpayers He says that the approach could raise £12billion a year Streeting said: “A member of my family is a cleaner in Lancashire. She pays a higher tax rate on her salary than her landlord pays for the growing value of the home she lives in. She slogs her guts out, he puts in far less effort, yet the state rewards him more than her. And we wonder why people are angry. “The system is penalising work. It’s not fair and it’s bad for our economy. We need a wealth tax that works. A pound made from simply owning assets should not be taxed less than a pound made from a hard day's work. We can do it in a way that is pro-growth, pro-entrepreneur and pro-work.”
English
@ClimateRetorts @roystyn76 @Toby_Toblarone @meadwaj @Kevin_Maguire Nah that's not true. Basic physics shows C=0 bond has sufficient resonance at IR to trap thermal energy. Venus is a famous result of 97% CO2 atmosphere getting far warmer than its orbit would imply.
English
@JGS952 @roystyn76 @Toby_Toblarone @meadwaj @Kevin_Maguire The reason many believe there's no link is from basic physics.
Spectroscopy tells us CO2 is very poor at absorbing IR and is a marginal greenhouse gas.
English
You’ll be hearing a lot of silly fuss about food price caps now. But note that the fall in inflation today is very largely about the fall in the price of household energy - which is a capped, government regulated price…
Office for National Statistics (ONS)@ONS
The Consumer Prices Index (CPI) rose by 2.8% in the 12 months to April 2026, down from 3.3% in the 12 months to March 2026. Read more ➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/inflat…
English
@Frances_Coppola @cdglove98 @malcolm_reavell Can you be super specific? What specific laws and regs prevent our monetary system from operating how it's described here:
#abstract" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.10…
English
@cdglove98 @malcolm_reavell It really is not how they work in practice. The theory unfortunately assumes away laws and regulations that prevent monetary systems working in that way.
English
@roystyn76 @Toby_Toblarone @meadwaj @Kevin_Maguire "It is unequivocal that human influence has warmed the atmosphere, ocean and land since pre-industrial times."
Plenty to read here. All state of the art climate science, synthesised across hundreds of peer reviewed studies across every continent.
ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1…
English
@JGS952 @Toby_Toblarone @meadwaj @Kevin_Maguire Show me to a peer reviewed scientific paper proving a direct link between the use of fossil fuel and the climate. As a scientist, I won't accept conjecture or mickey mouse computer modelling.
English
@roystyn76 @Toby_Toblarone @meadwaj @Kevin_Maguire I'm curious why you think there's no proven link. It's not something you can have an opinion on. It's the same as saying "there's no link between germs & disease".
Would you like me to explain the greenhouse effect and radiative forcing of Earth's atmosphere and oceans to you?
English
@JGS952 @Toby_Toblarone @meadwaj @Kevin_Maguire No. Apart from the fact that there is no proven link between the climate and the use of fossil fuels. It is pointless that a tiny country like the UK damages its economy with Net Zero, while far larger countries like China, India, Russia, and the USA continue with fossil fuels.
English
@roystyn76 @Toby_Toblarone @meadwaj @Kevin_Maguire I'm talking about the unavoidable requirement for all of humanity to stop burning fossil fuels to avoid civilisational collapse this century.
English
@JGS952 @Toby_Toblarone @meadwaj @Kevin_Maguire The taxpayer wouldn't have to fork out £billions of their hard earned cash to fund fossil fuel energy. Norway is a beacon in a sea of Net Zero hypocrisy, and they are laughing at the UK who, instead of using its own ample fossil fuels, pays Norway a premium rate for theirs.
English
@roystyn76 @Toby_Toblarone @meadwaj @Kevin_Maguire I'm assuming nothing would persuade you of the obvious necessity to stop burning fossil fuels?
English
@JGS952 @Toby_Toblarone @meadwaj @Kevin_Maguire The state has to fund Net Zero because it is a bigger money pit than HS2 and will be just as big a waste of money. You can't have the unnecessary unscientific and unbelievably costly Net Zero and a thriving economy.
English
@Toby_Toblarone @roystyn76 @meadwaj @Kevin_Maguire Of course, like with any real asset, it depreciates over time. But the point is FF is simply much more profitable, particularly when an enormous amount of sunk investment lingers. Private firms will simply not take multi decade horizon risks. The state is the only actor who can.
English
@JGS952 @roystyn76 @meadwaj @Kevin_Maguire Isn't there also a cost of maintenance with renewables, though?
English
@Toby_Toblarone @roystyn76 @meadwaj @Kevin_Maguire They are structurally cheaper forms of energy as the operational fuel input costs are zero. They take relatively higher capex but FF margins are much higher - perhaps *because* FF is so captured by cartel like production ecosystems.
English
@JGS952 @roystyn76 @meadwaj @Kevin_Maguire I see your point about just because something is not profitable to capital it doesn't mean its without public interest for the state to do it? But why would fossil fuels be more profitable if renewable were actually cheaper - if they were private enterprise would take advantage
English
Developing a holistic and responsible new economic framework has never been more important; one based on real resource provisioning within our state-centred monetary production economies.
Never perfect but it's time the status quo is systematically dismantled.
Jamie Smith@JGS952
Economic stabilisation is about designing a resilient, sustainable economy where a range of policy levers control inflationary pressures. The current approach via interest rates is bad policy, often ill-suited to the problem, and regressive. open.substack.com/pub/jgs952/p/h…
English
@Milds72 @faisalislam That's because the BoE chose to continue increasing its policy rate for a while after Truss and it still sits 125 basis points higher at 3.75%. And then the Iran war make markets think it'll be increased again in the future so are pricing in a BoE response to inflation.
English
NEW
10y gilt yield fell sharply on better inflation figures down 13 basis points and dipped below 5% now close to close at 4.99% … reversing last weeks uncertainty related rises…
English
@DanielJHannan Simple supply demand logic often doesn't capture the dynamics. Supply is not constrained due to insufficient entrepreneurial investment in that segment.. Rationing is done somehow. Prices can often be the most regressive way to do so for a lot of essentials.
English
A reminder that rising prices are a signal to suppliers to make more of something. Price-fixing always ends up exacerbating the problem, because producers and merchants have no incentive to sell at an artificially low price. Very sad that this needs explaining.
English
@roystyn76 @meadwaj @Kevin_Maguire Just because something is not profitable to capital does not mean it shouldn't be done in the public interest. Fossil fuels are immensely more profitable than renewables still, despite or perhaps *because* renewables are cheaper.
English
@JGS952 @meadwaj @Kevin_Maguire If it's such a good idea, then let investors fund the infrastructure and stop the green levies that make us all pay excessive amounts for our energy, causing inflation, the collapse of businesses and the ensuing job losses.
English
@roystyn76 @meadwaj @Kevin_Maguire You're confusing transition investment requirements to scale up infrastructure and recompose the system to a VRE + nuclear one with the ongoing resource costs post transition. VRE+ is the by far most efficient and resource unintensive system for energy supply.
English
@meadwaj @Kevin_Maguire Coal, oil, and gas have never needed taxpayer subsidises. However, Net Zero needs huge taxpayer subsidises, which inflates the price of energy and means Britain has the highest energy prices in the developed world, which is very bad for businesses, households, and jobs.
English
@afneil Neoliberalism is a perfectly coherent ideology. It's the political-economic doctrine that prioritises market allocation, private capital,deregulation,sound money, privatisation, weakened organised labour, and global capital mobility, while reducing the economic role of the state.
English
So bored with know-nothings who think it smart to throw out the word ‘neo-liberalism’ as if it settles the argument when, in fact, it contributes nothing to public discourse.
Sandra Hope@spanishblueye
@afneil But the national direction has ruined the UK in many ways in areas like that one. Neoliberalism is it's title, still being practiced now to great lengths. The media avoids the conversation as the media is run by corporate interests & capitalism, biased reporting on a daily basis.
English
@AaronBastani 1. Bonds aren't a financing mechanism for the state. They are just a way of the state offering duration to sterling saving that has already occured by the time bonds are issued.
2. While redistributive tax on wealth plays a necessary role, it's a highly inefficient fiscal lever.
English
The figure you need to be thinking about is the deficit, which is circa £100 billion a year.
But it’s also true that you can worry about bond markets less when you don’t rely on them financing day-to-day spending.
Which is partly why we need a wealth tax on the ultra rich.
Tom Harwood@tomhfh
There are only two ways to stop being "in hock" to the bond markets - as outlined here:
English
@AscendedYield Nationalisation into public assets expands the state's balance sheet though. Equity doesn't change and this can be fully consistent with responsible fiscal policy, even the not-fit-for-purpose fiscal rule framework of the last 30 years.
English
@Payne_rising @AyoCaesar Where do you think bond holders got £3tn from to buy all those bonds?
English
@AyoCaesar You wouldn't have to think of bond markets AT ALL if we didn't borrow £3 trillion British pounds.
You could have the most woke left wing crackpot government the world has ever seen.... If we didn't borrow £3 trillion...
Let that sink in.
English
Jamie Smith retweetledi
A core proposition in #MMT is that we can always create whatever money is necessary to maintain a full employment economy. The Federal Reserve building is named after the Fed Chairman who made the same point in 1939. #MarrinerEccles
English