Analysis Breaking comment

Video: Nandy says Labour supports BofE’s interest-rate assault on ordinary people

Critics continue to point out Bank of England is attacking those who aren’t causing inflation. ‘That’s a decision for the Bank and we’ll support them on that’, says Shadow Levelling Up Secretary

Smiling through our pain: Lisa Nandy and Starmer’s Labour

Shadow Levelling Up Secretary has said the Bank of England is doing the right thing and has the support of Keir Starmer’s Labour in its latest assault on ordinary people.

The Bank’s decision to raise interest rates yet again will cause enormous misery for millions, pushing up mortgages and rents when people are already going under and making even more children and parents go hungry and lose their homes – and are self-evidently failing to achieve the reductions in inflation they claim these attacks will cause.

This is not controversial. The Bank itself admitted it the last time they raised interest rates.

Yet Nandy was not willing to stand up for the suffering masses and say the obvious – that interest rates will not stop inflation that is driven by corporate greed and profiteering on bills that people don’t have a choice but to pay, such as energy and food:

This is not a new phenomenon: Starmer has always refused to stand up against this ceaseless attack for the people who need support. The UK is without a parliamentary opposition, a situation that has been created intentionally and is being maintained with the collusion of the UK’s corrupt ‘mainstream’ media. The consequence of this is yet more suffering in an already-appallingly unequal and unjust country, while those who should oppose it give it their support and applause.

SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and can afford to without hardship – please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep doing its job.

If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.


  1. It is depressing that the cult of Starmer and his adherence to the elite has grabbed control of the so-called “Labour” Party. Clueless, dishonest, autocratic WORSE than Johnson by a country mile!

  2. Tax expert Richard Murphy does a Janet and John here:

    “Bought-in costs have increased by 10% – roughly the rate of inflation in the last year.

    Wage increases have been kept to 6% – which will be tough on many staff.

    The big increase is, however, in interest costs. The company pays interest at 3% over bank base rate. So, the rate has grown from near enough 3% to 8%, or a growth of about 160%.

    In comparison, profits have only been targeted to increase at the same rate as wages.

    The resulting overall cost increase is 15.3%, with more than half of that being due to interest, which imposes a bigger cost increase than external costs and the wage settlement combined…..

    ….Profits have now been eliminated. The company’s future is, then, in doubt….

    …My points are threefold. First, it is not wages that are driving up inflation.

    Second, it is interest rate rises that are driving up prices.

    And third, interest rate rises are now so extreme that many businesses will face the threat of failure.

    The Bank of England is welcome to use this model and think about the consequences which they have created. Unfortunately, I suspect that they will not. That’s because what this model makes clear is that we face a crisis created in Threadneedle Street, but they have no understanding of what they have done and are doing.”

    And, to cap it all, the Labour Party and its ruling clique of wannabe oligarchs also clearly have no understanding of what they are doing either.

    Doubtless the Village Idiot will be along shortly to give us another rendition of his well worn ‘drowning in his own ignorant bullshit’ routine.

    And that’s why we face desperate economic times.

    1. They understand exactly what they are doing. Look to the UN and others. CBDC is coming. They have to break the system for us to want it. The Nigerian experiment has failed.

    2. Dave
      Everything has increased by at least 10% and profits are soaring
      ‘It’s the Rich what get the pleasure, it’s the poor what get the blame’
      Always follow the money

  3. The ongoing increases in interest rates underlines the structural weakness of the UK economy and we now see that Noo-Noo-Labour has no answers other than kow-towing to the bankers.

  4. Problem is the movement has been captured and it costs very little money and involves a handful of people
    Democracy is fine until it is corrupted, then it is practically useless and no one appears to know WTF to do about it
    What Obama and Brown failed to do has simply delayed and multiplied the financial collapse
    When it comes, we the people own everything, but what is the point if we are incapable of protecting our freedoms

  5. We need to find willing people within the local community with a profile high enough to stand as candidates in the next GE against:
    -Keir Starmer
    -Wes Streeting
    -Lisa Nandy
    -Rachel Reeves
    Streeting and Nandy have under 10K majority. Hence a local candidate with a strong profile can see them both packing. Reeves majority is under 11K could be put under pressure too.
    The deck of card effect would be to protect them as Starmer needs all of them as cabinet minister and in the process Labour would not attack effectively the Tory marginal seats it needs to win or to defend effectively the Labour marginal it needs to protect.

    1. Excellent post Maria.

      Although Reeves’ 10.5k majority in Leeds West is no-where near as strong or weak as it has been (Corbyn’s GE17 gave her an astounding 15,900+ vote majority), Starmer’s leadership has caused her PLP to be the most severely reduced (of membership) of all in the Leeds area, and this, more than anything else, will weaken her re-election efforts. CLP insiders reckon her majority will reduce (half again) to the levels of her initial win, when she halved Labour’s majority compared to her predecessor, so your idea of finding a high-profile (celebrity even) competitor to her as Starmer’s candidate for the next GE is particularly promising and attractive.

      Leeds is shamed by Leeds West’s parliamentary representative.

      1. steveh: “The last time I looked you can’t even be certain that Jeremy is going to stand at the next general election”

        He wouldn’t need to stand for parliament in order for the peace an justice project to be turned into a political party.

      2. qwertboi – I’ve expressed my doubts that Jeremy will stand for parliament in the next GE many times on these pages.

      3. qwertboi – He sure has – ad nauseam – and no doubt will do so again repeatedly.
        Meanwhile the world moves on.

      1. Bazza – Are you having a laugh? The last time I looked you can’t even be certain that Jeremy is going to stand at the next general election.

    2. You make good points.
      It is interesting to note that in almost every constituency occupied by leading Corbyn opponents, their vote went up noticably in 2017.
      If you look at Nandy’s performance since 2010, and that of her two-term predecessor, Labour’s vote in Wigan constituency is in decline from the ’80’s and ’90s, when it could expect over 30,000 votes in a general election.
      The right have control, and the town and constituency are suffering the consequences. The right are good at covering potential scandals.
      Wikipedia has its uses…….

    3. Very good, Maria.
      Perhaps a local doctor who could be a candidate for a defend the NHS party.
      Starmer and Streeting have both, of course, received funding from private health interests who will be expecting a return on their investment.

  6. Nandy
    The lowest point in the history of the Labour party was apparently the AS Scam
    So please someone ask where the War Criminal and Iraq come in her opinion
    For the record we forget Harold Wilson said No to Vietnam
    Not a single Red Tory is fit to wipe the arse of JC or Wilson

  7. At first sight I mistakenly thought that the headline read “Video NASTY……” however after reading the article it turns out I was right.

  8. Genius is knowing when to stop
    Goes the famous quote
    Unfortunately for the Kleptocracy it is also the last thought that passes through their minds as their heads fall into the bread basket

    1. Doug – In the absence of being able to convince enough people of the veracity of your ideology are you advocating a violent revolution?

      1. Herr Flick
        It’s a simple point, ignore history at your peril
        As our Resident Nazi, what do you think

      2. Doug – “what do you think”

        I think that you’ve avoided answering my question.

      3. Herr Flick
        With enemies like you, who needs friends

        Been trying to think of something derogatory that rhymes with Flick

      4. Doug – Or alternatively instead of behaving like you are back in the school playground you could try growing up a bit and answer a simple and straightforward question.

      5. Herr Flick
        Our Resident Nazi
        What say you to Pope Francis, he was speaking directly to Starmer
        Can you point to a group of individuals in this country who you can rely on in the forthcoming GE
        As for me I will now add Catholics to the list who hate your leader
        Instead of ‘Things can only get better” it looks like Alexi Sayles ‘ I hate Keir Starmer’ will be No1 at next GE

      6. “Doug – ………………… are you advocating a violent revolution?”
        So says the person who was ecstatic when he entertained the ludicrous idea that Prigozhin was about to overthrow the Russian government.

  9. It always amazes me when the pundits manage to get away with the mantra that the BoE raises interest rates to combat inflation, when any one with an iota of sense can see that raising rates will fuel inflation.
    They come out with the idea that prices rise because people have decided to pay more for things, rather than that the vendors have increased the price.
    Time was when some in the media would have pointed out this nonsense, but that was decades ago.
    How long before people in the UK start to get angry, as is already happening in Germany?
    And regarding Nandy – What a stupid comment. If, as is claimed, the BoE is independent of politicians, then it is not up to politicians to support the BoE’s actions, or otherwise. The role of politicians should be to have a view on whether or not it is a good idea to farm out such a decision to the BoE.

    1. The BoE is responsible for the people being ruled by an individual of it’s (the Bank and media) preferred choice. How can anyone believe that it is apolitical. It is not owned by the nation which makes it’s actions in the political sphere, heinous and reprehensible.

      1. Gorbachev, I forgot to write, excellent post. Thanks. One would think that some things are obvious, but they aren’t.

  10. There is no such thing as wage – price inflation
    Trickle Down effect
    BofE independence
    Free markets
    Free Press

  11. Oh Dear. Lightweight Lisa.
    “Economics without class politics is tiddlywinks.”

  12. Neither the Tories or Labour would last long under a properly democratic proportionate voting system. The corrupt, time-serving elites, in both big parties, are undoubtedly colluding to prevent voting reform.

    In the Netherlands, at their last general election (2021), 17 parties won seat representation,and the largest single party share was just 21%.
    PR limits the harm any single party can do and would definitely give the UK a more left-wing/libertarian flavoured politics, as that’s where the majority of the population are as polling shows without the tribalism the two-parties engender. It’s not reflected at Westminster, which is, if anything, well to the right of the population and basically reflects the billionaire owned tabloids and follows US foreign policy.
    On which , another benefit of PR is we’d also get our sovereignty back; as the US elite exploit the FPTP system which delivers unrepresentative large majorities, allowing autocratic PMs to be reliably subservient to Washington.
    Try getting consensus in a multi-party coalition for another calamitous Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya or Syrian intervention. PR would open debate, allow British PMs to say ‘no’ to the US and open up politics, with views finally given a fair hearing.

  13. Scabby Nandy is an arse licker she was up JC arse when he was leader then calls him a A/S and wants him to apologise now she’s up heir starmers arse

    1. Brian61

      She’s just a careerist through and through, probably unemployable outside of politics. What other skills does she possess?

      It’s a similar story with Angela Rayner, once, the left’s great hope. No way would she be earning anything like her Westminster salary + expenses outside parliament, either in the public or private sector.

      Rayner was elected to act as a restraining influence on Starmer and remind him of his 10 Pledges – she should and could have been that thorn in his side, as Deputy leader Tom Watson was in Corbyn’s.
      If she had fulfilled that role that she was elected in the expectation she would, then members wouldn’t have left in their droves. Instead, she’s enjoyed the salary + trappings and kept her gob shut about Starmer’s despotic turn plus his purges. And in the process she’s alienated the Left whose support she had and should’ve nurtured.

      1. Rayner will quickly find she is yesterday’s person next vote round.

      2. Ludus57

        It’s probably worse than that for Rayner.

        The left won’t even rally to her defence if some underhand stunt is pulled by Starmer. Many think they’ll abolish the role of Deputy PM, just to get rid of her.

        Starmer is building a team of right-wingers, politically no different from the Tories on economic, domestic policies and foreign policy. They don’t want anyone of the left sat in that cabinet objecting to their treachery, as they sell off the NHS; build on the Tories’ authoritarianism, or plan to go to war alongside the US.

      3. Andy – “Many think they’ll abolish the role of Deputy PM, just to get rid of her.”

        Really, I thought that Corbyn’s team had already tried that one with Tom Watson. As I recall it that little fiasco didn’t go as well as they hoped it would.

      4. I suspect that she is one of those people who did not join the coup only because of the intervention of Karie Murphy.

      5. Tony – Did Karie intervene by pinning her up against a wall by her throat.?

      6. Andy, she also gets to go on the telly. Now what do you think that she thinks is more important? Us or the tube?

    2. Far from it, Brian. She was constantly working to undermine JC. She even co-chaired the pathetic Owen Smith campaign.

      1. Ludus57

        Nandy is first and foremost, for Nandy.

        She’s the classic weathervane politician. She could sound quite left-wing when that was the prevailing party membership sentiment under Corbyn. But she wasn’t really a friend of the left, it seemed calibrated at the time, an leftist act adjusted to suit the audience and their reactions.

        Now she doesn’t need to bother with the pretence, so this right-wing face is her real face. Her Brexity behaviour was driven by fear of losing her leave voting seat. She played games in the HoC and even media pundits found it difficult to predict what she’d vote for or against. She certainly wasn’t helping Corbyn or Labour whips out, with her unpredictable voting.

  14. As LN, and every other New New Labour MP knows. If it aint hurting, it aint wotking.

  15. A big article about the forthcoming by election in Selby and Ainsty, where Labour thinks it has a chance, appeared in yesterday’s Observer. But Labour has absolutely nothing at all to offer. This article amplifies what we already knew.

    All money to Starmer as Leader of the Opposition ought to be cut off and he ought to re-pay what he has already been given.

    1. Tony – Apart from a load of empty rhetoric what are you and your comrades offering the electorate.

      1. Herr Flick
        Have you heard of Democracy
        Socialists are proposing we give it a go in this country
        As our Resident Nazi, what say you

      2. Doug – …and how are you hoping to achieve this when you don’t have anyone that the electorate can vote for.
        The last time the left put up a significant number of candidates for election they all lost their deposits.

      3. SteveH

        The ‘Left’ haven’t lost, they were tricked, big difference. They were (or thought they were) offering the electorate 10 left-wing Pledges and continuity Corbynism, under Starmer. But he proved to be an undercover establishment trickster, who conned everyone.

        Now, the Left seem may powerless, but they aren’t, not entirely, as they can force a hung parliament by abstaining or voting for other parties

      4. Andy – I was referring to the 2015 general and local elections when the TUSC (funded by the Socialist Alliance) put forward 135 parliamentary and 619 local authority candidates. Quite an impressive effort, BUT unfortunately for ‘the left’ ….

        All the parliamentary candidates lost their deposits. Overall they only managed to attract an average of 284 votes each (down from the 2010GE when they fielded 44 candidates who averaged 354 votes apiece).
        As for the 619 local authority candidates – The TUSC gained no seats (and, in one ward, no votes) and lost three anti-cuts councillors in Leicester and Hull. However it wasn’t all bad news, they managed to hang onto one affiliated councillor each in Warrington, Walsall and Hull, and two in Southampton.

        If the above results are anything to go by then your claim that ‘the left’ “can force a hung parliament by abstaining or voting for other parties” just isn’t credible, you simply don’t have the numbers.

  16. Thank you Dave Hansell for very clear explanation from Richard Murphy***

    *** Obviously some extreme Leftie ;- )

  17. Re: The next story.
    Would the Pope be excluded from the Labour Party?
    Is the Pope …………?

      1. Would the pope be an electoral liability?

        Keef’s shielded more nonces and you’re convinced of his infallibility

      2. Steve Richards – One party states like the oppressive regimes in China and Russia that so many of the contributors to these pages inexplicably defend and admire.

      3. “Would the Pope be an electoral liability?”

        Go figure…..

        “The 2019 edition of the British Social Attitudes Survey, which includes Scotland and Northern Ireland, includes figures on religious adherence in 2018. In that year, 52% of British residents professed no religion while only 38% professed Christianity. Church of England or Anglican adherents made up 12% of respondents, while Catholics made up 7%.”

        UK population is around 67 million. 7% represents about 4.7 million.

        Meanwhile, from the same report:

        “Among other religious adherents in England and Wales, Muslims are the most populous. They now make up 6.5% of the population. Muslims now number 3.9 million, an increase of 1.2 million from a decade ago. Hindus now number about one million, 1.7% of the population. Sikhs number 524,000, just under 1%, while Buddhists number 273,000, about 0.5% of the population. The collective Jewish population numbers 271,000, smaller than the collective Buddhist population.”

        In these terms of electoral liability that’s a no brainer. 4.7 million (7%) of the population or 271,000 (0.5%).

        Except of course for the resident Village Idiot who clearly does not have one.

      4. Dave – “In these terms of electoral liability that’s a no brainer. 4.7 million (7%) of the population or 271,000 (0.5%).”

        Despite all the stats you’ve unfortunately neglected to make it clear what your answer to my question is.

      5. OK. We will have a poll.

        Hands up anyone else who does not understand how, in the terms used by this sites single occupant of the Remove, a demographic with 4.7 million potential voters is less of a electoral liability than one with 271,000 potential voters?

      6. Dave – Or alternatively you could try a different approach and try something novel (for you), simply answer the question instead of desperately trying to prove to yourself how clever you are. ¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯

      7. The question was answered steveH. The fact that you do not want to/are incapable of understanding it (delete whichever is inapplicable) is your problem.

        Deal with rather than trying desperately to offload it to the grown ups.

    1. He would be, if he raised social injustice, inequality or Palestinian suffering.

      Loving Davos bankers’ excess, supporting apartheid and being friends with Epstein, even post-conviction … he’d have much firmer foothold in Starmer’s sick party.

      1. I keep a close eye on the Christian churches. Both sides are experiencing what amounts to civil wars. The chickens are coming home to roost much to the chagrin of the chess players. You can only move pieces in a certain way and if they get exposed it will cost the grandmasters dear. It has. You will find more socialism in the bloody pews than in this Labour thing.

  18. Just seen another clip from the Kuenssberg – Nandy interview, on the BBC website.
    It’s rabbit in the headlights time, I see.

  19. The ‘Left’ haven’t lost, they were tricked, big difference. They were (or thought they were) offering the electorate 10 left-wing Pledges and continuity Corbynism, under Starmer. But he proved to be an undercover establishment trickster, who conned everyone.

    But Andy, wee stevie voted for Corbyn TWICE.

    And then he voted for keef – but ONLY because he was‘ best of a bad bunch’, although he was completely aware of the fact that keef had promised continuity Corbyn.

    …As well as a second(third and fourth) referendum.

    So wee Stevie was had over more than those who only voted for continuity Corbyn. He didn’t get his second (third and fourth) referendum like keef promised.

    But it’s all Corbyn’s fault. Not keef’s. Corbyn binned those ten pledges. It’s Corbyn, and his years of ambiguity wants to make Brexit work.

    And now wee gobshite wants to enjoy keef making brexit work from his Caribbean butthole where he’s completely unaffected by the daily grind that UK citizens have to endure as well as the complete lack of choice of direction we’re lumbered with.

    One that wee gobshite himself lumbered us with – before he pissed off to the other side of the hemisphere to pontificate to us left behind.

    So, you see, the wee gobshite KNOWS what’s best. Keef tells him, and he tells us.

    Because neither are ever wrong. Corbym is.

  20. SteveH “Would the pope be an electoral liability?”

    To a political party lead whose leader is an entryist consistently on the ‘wrong side of history’, who represses the party’s members and enures that Labour provides no leadership to its people in a cost-of-living crisis, then probably, in the minds of Rupert Murdoch and the Akehurst-coloured NEC, he might be an electoral liability. In the real world, No.

    But, lets be honest, the Holy Father could never be a PPC for Labour. The Starmer-lead party would ban him.
    “In May 2015, Francis welcomed Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas to the Vatican. Several media outlets reported that Francis praised Abbas as “an angel of peace”, though his actual words were the following: “The angel of peace destroys the evil spirit of war. I thought about you: may you be an angel of peace.”[413] The Vatican signed a treaty recognizing the state of Palestine.[414] The Vatican issued statements concerning the hope that the peace talks could resume between Israel and Palestine. Abbas’ visit was on the occasion of the canonization of two Palestinian nuns.[415]” ( wiki)

    He’s the most vicious and vile anti-Semite on the Planet

  21. Re. and the Holy Father of the largest (2.6billion) religious community on earth’s plea to the artists he invited to the Sistine chapel to promote social justice through their work, Ken Loach, was undoubtedly one of the most effective ‘catalysts for social justice’ present. Respect Ken!

    Francis told the group that “neither art nor faith can leave things simply as they are: They change, transform, move and convert them. Art can never serve as an anesthetic; it brings peace, yet far from deadening consciences, it keeps them alert.”

    A good reason for Britain’s 4 million+ Roman Catholics to think hard and long about the virtue of voting Labour when it is led by Keir Rodney Starmer who is intent on yet more stealth nationalisation of the NHS.

    1. From the point of view of consistency of past actions and behaviours by the Starmer Junta remaining rank and file members of the Labour Party who are Catholic will have reasonable grounds for concern at this endorsement of Ken Loach from the Pope. After all, if you can be ejected from party membership for liking the Foo fighters or a tweet which is positive towards an environmental policy of the Green Party the guilt by association process favoured by this rogue regime is likely to see a massive cull of members who support the Pope and by extension Ken Loach.

      Except of course for one very specific special priviliged war criminal member who iis untouchable.

      1. untouchable – and a convert to Catholicism, Dave H –

        The Roman Catholic ‘Church on earth’ is, to me, a wonderful enigma, encompassing a wider range of ‘politics’ than other organisations of faith. Liberation Theology in South America endorsed a marxist critique and socio-economic analysis (well, not ALL of it, obviously) of ‘matters temporal’ (as they would say).
        FYI: I’m reliably informed that Pope Francis, a Jesuit, is significantly influenced by a basque Spanish ‘liberation theologist, Jesuit Fr. General Pedro Arrupe a person whose ‘practical socialism’ is profound.
        Yes, despite there being many artists at the Sistine Chapel event that SW’s next article is on, I strongly believe Pope Francis was talking to Ken Loach in an almost intimate way. There’s no doubt in my mind, Pope Francis (born Jorge Mario Bergoglio) would, in a different world, and for the very same reasons Jermy Corbyn created it, be a member of The Peace and Justice Project (as would certain Aramaic-speaking guy about 2000 years ago).

  22. Friends, the comment – “Would the pope be an electoral liability?” – is very revealing.
    It illustrates what happens when the focus is on nothing other than winning an election, to the exclusion of any other considerations; considerations such as what is moral, what is honest, what is in the interests of the poor and the oppressed, etc. etc.
    It is all about personal ambition. Starmer wants to be PM. Who cares who suffers? Who cares who is thrown under the bus?
    In the words of an American election poster from way back “Would you buy a used car from this man?”

      1. When it comes to these people they offer fragile individuals ice cream. That’s either the first or last action in their playback.

    1. Not surprising really, centrists don’t have any political ambition to make things better. Their only ambition is to frustrate the left and receive praise plus a pat on the back from the Tories & their press, for doing so.

    2. goldbach – I’m guessing that one doesn’t get to be the pope without a modicum of personal ambition.

      1. Just spotted this response, if it can be deemed as such.
        I would remind you that I addressed my comment to “friends”.

      2. goldbach – Your need for a ‘safe space’ is your problem.

      3. Herr Flick
        Could any Christian vote for Red Tories
        When the Pope was celebrating Ken Loach, where was your man and how far up Murdochs arse was his Snozzle

  23. Background information:

    “I went to see Blair/Brown and told them they should make the Bank of England independent.”

    Former Conservative Chancellor Norman Lamont, Reflections, BBC Radio 4, 12 August 2019.

  24. Wages and Putin cause inflation, appears to be the dominant message from MSM; not QE nor high fuel prices, but wages? Nato’s convenient war in Ukraine and striking workers; one must be supported with billions of pounds for weapons and the other……..?
    I understand the logic of an argument that states, for example, that if bakers were given a wage increase, the price of bread may increase & be a small factor in the multi causes of inflation, but if public service workers were given a wage increase, for example nurses, the price of what will increase? Their pay increase would be paid by slightly higher taxes which will take money out of the economy, which is deflationary, which is what the ‘independent’ Bank of England states it wants to achieve causing possible recession or more likely stagflation. How can this policy contribute to a healthy economy?
    Stagflation is the main problem caused by lack of money in people’s pockets as maufacturers cannot sell their goods because there are no paying customers, which causes the price of goods to fall but no profit whatsoever. The refusal of MSM economists and the Bank of England to identify the primary causes of inflation i.e. fuel costs & printing money will only extend the ‘new austerity’ being imposed on the British people.
    The one question that MSM will never ask is ‘why is petrol and gas extracted from rigs around the British Isles is sold on the International Spot Market and not directly to the British people?’ Big profits guaranteed for whom?

  25. “A handful of billionaires are filling their pockets while children go hungry and homeless people die on the streets.

    I think that everybody deserves a place to live and enough food to eat.

    Is that really such a radical idea?”

    The latest from Jeremy Corbyn.

    There’s clearly no place for people who hold such views in Starmer’s Labour Party.

  26. Happy to be schooled but Murphy’s take seems selective, not only because services, which have a short chain and are not experiencing the massive inflation evident in food, seem an odd thing to model but also because interest payments are a given – if you have the money then you are not borrowing at x%. In an elongated chain wages are also going to be a contributory factor so the figures seem designed to correspond to an atypical scenario.

    1. And therein lies the key problem. Because Murphy, regardless of how I might regard him as an individual, is not talking about services per se. He is talking about the productive economy rather than the unproductive one. The fact that what passes for the media these days in the form of so called “quality” (sic) broadsheets like the Times and the Guardian can look favourably upon the demise of the CBI,….

      demonstrates just how bad matters are in terms of the dire state of economies like the UK – among the rest of the West – which is built entirely on services with little in the way of productive industry.

      And that is a large part of the context of Murphy’s point. The fact that people automatically equate a functioning economy with the unproductive service sector rather than productive industry – as in the case with the above observation made by Tim White – speaks volumes.

      Because the largest part of that service sector by a country mile is the FIRE (Finance Insurance and Real Estate) based almost entirely on the unproductive rentier model of operation.

      Because when you dismantle your productive industry and farm it out to the rest of the world outside of Josep Borrell’s “Garden” into what Borrell refers to as “The Jungle (ie everywhere outside the “Golden Billion” of the West) in favour of an unproductive rentier economy you very quickly, over a short period of time, lose the expertise, experience and knowledge which goes with it.

      Which is why – to cite just a few examples among many:

      – roads and pavements resurfaced only a few years ago are full of potholes because even if the will existed to do it properly rather than on the cheap the expertise, experience and knowledge, after over four decades of this nonsense, no longer exists to do it to a quality standard which will last more than a few years. (And don’t get me started on the now non existent but vitally necessary concept and practice of maintenance).

      – it takes a minimum of two visits from the Water company to get them to discover the clear to a blind man on a galloping horse leak in the street that people report.

      – the delusional elites who think they can create their own reality who make the decisions in the collective West are getting their metaphorical arses handed to them in Ukraine because the industrial capacity – along with the expertise, competence, experience and knowledge which has been deliberately expunged from the system by the Oligarchical class in favour of an ecomy based almost entirely on parasitical rentierism – no longer exists in the West. The collective West no longer has the industrial means and capacity to engage in industrial conflict.

      And such an economy – regardless of whether its Johnson, Sunak, Blair or Starmer as the nominal PM – can only operate as long as the center (The “Garden”) can raid the value in the form of tribute from the resources of everyone else on the planet (The “Jungle”).

      Which is why the proxy war in Ukraine to access (read plunder) the resources of the Eurasian Heartland represents the last throw of the dice of these numpties and their shills. Because Borrell’s “Jungle” has collectively decided it has had enough. Hence the rush to exit the incompetent and unworkable Western model.

      Once that prop is taken away – a process already underway – the collapse is inevitable. As Michael Hudson details in his recent tome “The Collapse of Antiquity.”

      Murphy may not be very adept at joining the dots in many cases but on this matter – despite what he himself concedes is only a simple model – he is headed in the right direction.

  27. I see the unfunny, untalented gobshite baddiel’s at it again…

    The shit one in Newman & baddiel.

    The shit one in skinner & baddiel.

    He was (to both Newman & skinner) what Andrew Ridgeley was to George Michael (And I never was a fan of Michael’s).

    Or bernie winters** to Mi…. No, hang on, that’s a shit example too. Both of them were shite.. But I guess THAT’S antisemitic too, eh davey?

    **And that bloody huge mutt of his.

      1. WTF’s it to you?

        Of course…You read the words unfunny and untalented and suspected I was referring to you. (Both are terms that can be justifiably attributed to you, in fairness)

        But the keyword that triggered you was gobshite

        …And, in typical Pavlovian manner you reacted – even though you weren’t even mentioned or referred to.

        There are plenty of other gobshites infesting this world, you know?! baddiel being one of many. You just happen to be the most prominent on this (or any other) site.

        You just can’t help yourself, yet supposedly I’m the one following you around like a needy stray


      2. Toffee – ….and yet here you are again having another rant. 🤔

  28. Nandy Pandy is an irrelevance, as is the neoliberal who frequents these pages.
    Look at the larger picture. Europe and North America are moving steadily to the right. The recent Greek elections and the state elections in Germany are two clear examples, but they are not alone.
    The neoliberals, with their determination to marginalise the left at all costs, have created a scenario where people who see their living standards rapidly eroding are being directed away from consideration of a left perspective.
    Governments are enacting more and more repressive legislation as people start to push back against the treatment meted out to them. The neoliberals seem to think that this puts them in an unassailable position.
    They may have another think coming.
    Watch France, the US and even the UK, in addition to Greece and Germany.
    It could be a long hot summer.

  29. As an aside….Another one bites the dust, from 30/6/23.

    East Cliff and Springbourne (Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole) council by-election result:

    GRN: 38.4% (+13.4)
    CON: 28.8% (+3.5)
    LAB: 27.7% (-1.4)
    LDEM: 5.1% (-2.1)

    No Ind (-13.4) as prev.

    Votes cast: 2,129

    Green GAIN from Labour.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: