Why don’t they bloody edit Polly?

She too grand for the odd correction or something?

Brexit casts its shroud over everything. The no-dealers grow more wild-eyed by the day; though sterling drops, prices rise.

It’s because sterling drops that prices rise.

Or is it that the editors just don’t know this either?

18 thoughts on “Why don’t they bloody edit Polly?”

  1. The ONLY issue with Brexit is the May/Hammond/Rudd scum at the top trying to undermine it.

    And they are Polly’s kind of well-off, middle-class, cultural Marxist, London Bubble BluLabour/ZaNu scum anyway.

    Time the old bag was out of what is laughingly called “a job”.

  2. So Much For Subtlety

    The no-dealers grow more wild-eyed by the day

    And if they keep this up they will overtake the Remainers in about 2043.

    Planet Polly must be an interesting place. From where I am it looks to be filled with barking loons.

  3. this is fairly advanced stuff, can’t expect graduates of Arts, English or journalism to grasp stuff like this.

  4. Hasn’t sterling actually risen a bit recently, on the back of interest rate rise expectations?

    And anyway sterling/euro rate is exactly the same as those heady days in 2008/9 when Gordon was in No 10, so can’t be that bad eh Polly? I don’t remember you telling us it was the harbinger of doom then………..

  5. Solid Steve 2: Squirrels of The Patriots

    Jim – Sterling is at 1.32 to the dollar, which – in the context of current uncertainties and it having mostly hovered between 1.4 to 1.6 since the last financial crisis – isn’t that big of a deal. Business goes on as usual.

    Long term, I’m not sure how much it actually matters what the exchange rate is, as long as it’s fairly stable. Sudden price shocks are a lot harder to mitigate.

    Can’t be arsed looking up Polly’s economic advice because it’ll be wine o’clock wibble, but I feel sure she isn’t in favour of rate rises or any of the other things that would be necessary to strengthen the pound.

    So this is like big fat Tom Watson’s criticism of the Yanks for force-feeding hunger striking prisoners, then criticising them for not force-feeding the same hunger strikers. Lefties spend their entire lives talking out of both ends at the same time.

  6. the pound weakness has not much to do with interest rates. Reversing QE would help but mostly having some adults in charge (and fire that cvnt Carney, God if there ever was a face that begs to be slapped alongside’s Osborne!) would see it back up to the 1.30s to the euro at least. Lets not forget it went from 1.30 on referendum day to 1.15 in short order. That wasn’t because of economic reasons.

  7. monoi;

    Not necessarily; there was some thought that prior to the referendum the pound was increasingly over-valued against the euro due to safe haven status due to the PIIGS.

  8. The level can be argued with but there is no doubt that the pound took a beating from the brexit fiasco and the mismanagement since then. The UK economy growing up faster than the Eurozone over the last few years justified a higher rate than today.

    Lets not forget that we are all poorer as a result, and with inflation at 3%, are being robbed as well.

    Carney, May, Hammond, Rudd, etc… are not only incompetent, they are making us poorer as well.

  9. Philip Scott Thomas

    Slightly off-topic (but Brexit-related) genuine question: Am I right in thinking that WTO tarrifs are just ceilings? That we could set our tariff level to zero, but we couldn’t go above the WTO level?

    The reason I ask is this article from the BBC’s Reality Check correspondent:

    Trade: With no new trade agreement with the EU, the rules of the World Trade Organisation would apply. Tariffs would be imposed on goods that the UK sends to the EU, and on goods the EU sends to the UK.

    It would not be the frictionless trade – certainly to begin with – that the government hopes to promote. Tariffs on many industrial products would be 2-3%, but on cars they would be 10% and on many agricultural products between 20% and 40%.

  10. But…but…but… by not charging ourself taxes on imports we will make our selves poorer. Professor Murphy tells us so. Are you arguing against the economic genius of our times?

  11. And on food imports, inequality. Ninety percent of the food is eaten by the 1%. Everyone knows that.

  12. She too grand for the odd correction or something?

    That’s a question more in Rocco’s line to answer but I suspect he could build a box set around the subject.

  13. @PST

    That gets my goat up too. Every reporter, every politician acts as if the tariff are mandatory under WTO terms.

    If it wasn’t for our esteemed host I wouldn’t know better. These people are supposed to know better!

  14. @Tim Worstall

    DM has an article today saying same as Philip Scott Thomas’ BBC link.

    DM source was a Resolution Foundation paper.

  15. And the second page of the same report, as both Guido and I picked up (me, forthcoming, ASI), says zero tariffs is possible and beneficial.

  16. @Tim Worstall

    You, or someone else from ASI or similar, need to do the “Take of the Week” opinion piece for BBC This Week and ram home WTO sets maximum tarrifs and zero is allowed.

    Even Redwood & JRM and P Hitchens frequenly appear not to grasp this.

    Example Take of the Week:
    BBC.This.Week.171012.-.Racist.Munroe.Bergdorf.Diatribe

    .
    PS: Brummer for once wrote some sense in DM today: on EU and on Lloyds/HBOS.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *