How much longer will this bear market go on for?

Altior

Do you have any actual evidence, not clickbait articles, on someone who spends money on their iPhone payments than on food rather than on food for themselves/their children.

I explicitly wrote 'there may be' and also It is of course impossible to delve into the personal finances of people who claim they can't afford to eat properly.

So no, I'm not claiming certainty. 

You can take a look at the debt boards on here though to see what people (some in severe debt difficulties) consider as essential spending. Anecdotal, granted but I feel a reasonably representative snapshot. 

DoublePolaroid

sevenhills said:

DoublePolaroid said:

You’re entitled to your opinion but your evidential bar is set so high it can never be cleared. The reason being that the consequences of poor nutrition in a country where nobody can realistically starve to death are felt over years and decades and will never show up in contemporaneous mortality statistics. 

Heart and circulatory deaths attributed to excess weight and obesity total around 31,000 every year in the UK, our new analysis reveals. This is equivalent to around 85 deaths each day from heart and circulatory diseases which are attributable to a BMI (body mass index) of 25 or more, such as a heart attack or stroke.16 Apr 2021

How many deaths are attributed to malnutrition?

Although obesity is in fact a function of malnutrition (poor nutrition can be due to micro/macronutrient excess as well as deficiency) I was specifically responding to the poster who was interested in deaths associated with under-nutrition. Of course deaths due to obesity also occur as a result of poor health over years and decades, which is why in general 25 years olds don’t die of heart attacks, no matter how corpulent they are, but lots of 50+ year olds do. 

The question regarding deaths attributed to malnutrition due to food poverty and/or deficiency of nutrition is impossible to answer due to the complexity of the interaction between nutritional deficiencies, the body’s metabolic/physiological responses to them and the outcome that may occur decades later. One very limited example to illustrate the point: inadequate calcium intake and low BMI as a result of under nutrition will increase the risk of osteoporosis later in life which itself increases the risk of hip fracture which in turn is associated with significant mortality. 

masonic

Just one point on the "top rate of tax". This is still effectively 60%, because although someone earning £150k+ won't pay 45% on the excess, they still will lose their personal allowance at a rate of £1 for each £2 their adjusted net income is above £100k.

Nebulous2

Altior said:

Nebulous2 said:

Altior said:

Nebulous2, that's another post full of hyperbole. Can you provide actual evidence for the quote below for example:

literally millions of them who are struggling to get enough to eat

And I don't mean how many people are getting freebies at 'food banks'. 

The number of people who have died due to malnutrition in the UK would be a starting point, assuming there are millions not eating enough, many of them must be dying, presumably. 

There is a difference between not having enough to eat and dying of it. 

Schools in England warn of crisis of ‘heartbreaking’ rise in hungry children | UK cost of living crisis | The Guardian

Don't like the Guardian? What about GB news? 

Sunday roast in decline with nearly a fifth of people not using oven as cost of living crisis bites (gbnews.uk)

I work two jobs but can’t afford to eat and live off chip shop scraps - I’ve lost half a stone in six weeks | The Sun

Food poverty in the UK: The causes, figures and solutions (bigissue.com)

University staff who can’t afford to eat ask for campus food banks | UK cost of living crisis | The Guardian

There is a difference between not having enough to eat and dying of it. 

Of course not, but if millions are not eating enough, it stands to reason that a proportion of them will end up dying.

I was hoping for actual evidence, not links to articles in the media. In the era of click bait. Everything is overwrought and exaggerated, twisted or simply fiction.  

Unfortunately, Nebulous2, there are many people who would view spending money on their latest iPhone monthly payments as being more essential than getting their grocery shops in. It is of course impossible to delve into the personal finances of people who claim they can't afford to eat properly. If they work full time however, I'd bet my life savings that they are wasting their income on other things. And can't afford to eat can be translated as the Spoons meals or lack of Deliveroo options. Not rice and potatoes. 

You may regard those as clickbait articles - and they may have prominent headlines, but they are all based on underlying surveys and data, including a House of Lords report. The figure of 1 in 5 people not using their oven was widely quoted last week, and is one I find astonishing. 

A lot of people in poverty are working - often minimum wage, sometimes zero-hour contracts, living a precarious existence, which is not where I find myself. 

Anyway - it isn't my judgment, nor your judgment, on the mini-budget which is important. The markets have weighed it up, and initially at least have found it wanting. You've an untested government, who removed the most senior treasury civil servant, engaging in untrusted, largely untested economic theories.

They had a credibility problem before they started, without 'shock and awe' tactics. 

GSP

Altior said:

I have no problem with any of the measures announced in the fiscal event. I would like to have seen more done around vat for example, and the lower income tax threshold, but we can't have everything. Politics will always play a part of course and maybe they are holding back on those changes until they are politically expedient. For the overall mission to work (actual growth), they need more than 2 years. 

It must be only part of an overall strategy though.

The country has spent way beyond its means for many years, and we have been cultivated into thinking that the 'government' is always a solution to all of our problems. It reached its nirvana when we decided that we could afford to pay millions of people to stay at home. Including the public sector on full pay. 

The desperate need to tackle the massive overspend on peripheral luxuries, virtue signalling and vanity projects. International aid (ie borrowing to hand over to corrupt NGOs and foreign governments). The tax credit absurdity. The millions of people who could actually work, but are deemed economically inactive. The NHS money pit. I could go on. 

I have no huge faith that the culture of 'free things' will be tackled by this administration, I do however have a little more hope than the Cameron, May, Johnson administrations. Or of course if Starmer ever reached the levers of power. 

It's not party political for me. I would happily support a Labour administration with this approach. This however is the first leadership team we have experienced for a very long time that aren't making decisions based on the hope of instant positive headlines in the BBC/Guardian, or the impact on snap polling. 

We ought to all hope that they are successful.

Quite agree with nearly all of this.

While they have just reversed some recent decisions, I would have liked them to go the whole or further hog than cutting tax by just 1p to 19p. If they really believed in what they are doing it should have gone down to 15p to ‘get things moving’.
It seems to me by just the 1p cut they are a ‘little scared’ what may happen.  

The recent personal tax allowance freeze should have also been tackled, and unshackled.

sevenhills

Nebulous2 said:
The figure of 1 in 5 people not using their oven was widely quoted last week, and is one I find astonishing. 

Using your oven is in no way related to poverty, health or body size 
I am guessing you are from a time when meals were cooked within the house.
I rarely cook meals, I am probably thinner than average, but I consider myself to by over weight.
I use my oven less than once per month.

sevenhills

GSP said:

Quite agree with nearly all of this.

While they have just reversed some recent decisions, I would have liked them to go the whole or further hog than cutting tax by just 1p to 19p. If they really believed in what they are doing it should have gone down to 15p to ‘get things moving’.
It seems to me by just the 1p cut they are a ‘little scared’ what may happen.

I would like to buy camper van, but I don't because of the debt.
We may help our children get on the housing ladder, but they will be paying this governments debt.

Type_45

sevenhills said:

GSP said:

Quite agree with nearly all of this.

While they have just reversed some recent decisions, I would have liked them to go the whole or further hog than cutting tax by just 1p to 19p. If they really believed in what they are doing it should have gone down to 15p to ‘get things moving’.
It seems to me by just the 1p cut they are a ‘little scared’ what may happen.

I would like to buy camper van, but I don't because of the debt.
We may help our children get on the housing ladder, but they will be paying this governments debt.

"This government's debt"...  so all the people who supported these policies are going to absolve themselves from any responsibility?

masonic

Type_45 said:

sevenhills said:

GSP said:

Quite agree with nearly all of this.

While they have just reversed some recent decisions, I would have liked them to go the whole or further hog than cutting tax by just 1p to 19p. If they really believed in what they are doing it should have gone down to 15p to ‘get things moving’.
It seems to me by just the 1p cut they are a ‘little scared’ what may happen.

I would like to buy camper van, but I don't because of the debt.
We may help our children get on the housing ladder, but they will be paying this governments debt.

"This government's debt"...  so all the people who supported these policies are going to absolve themselves from any responsibility?

I think we all know the answer to that. Best to think of it as the British taxpayer's debt.

Millyonare

Altior said:

Nebulous2 said:

Altior said:

Nebulous2, that's another post full of hyperbole. Can you provide actual evidence for the quote below for example:

literally millions of them who are struggling to get enough to eat

And I don't mean how many people are getting freebies at 'food banks'. 

The number of people who have died due to malnutrition in the UK would be a starting point, assuming there are millions not eating enough, many of them must be dying, presumably. 

There is a difference between not having enough to eat and dying of it. 

Schools in England warn of crisis of ‘heartbreaking’ rise in hungry children | UK cost of living crisis | The Guardian

Don't like the Guardian? What about GB news? 

Sunday roast in decline with nearly a fifth of people not using oven as cost of living crisis bites (gbnews.uk)

I work two jobs but can’t afford to eat and live off chip shop scraps - I’ve lost half a stone in six weeks | The Sun

Food poverty in the UK: The causes, figures and solutions (bigissue.com)

University staff who can’t afford to eat ask for campus food banks | UK cost of living crisis | The Guardian

There is a difference between not having enough to eat and dying of it. 

Of course not, but if millions are not eating enough, it stands to reason that a proportion of them will end up dying.

I was hoping for actual evidence, not links to articles in the media. In the era of click bait. Everything is overwrought and exaggerated, twisted or simply fiction.  

Unfortunately, Nebulous2, there are many people who would view spending money on their latest iPhone monthly payments as being more essential than getting their grocery shops in. It is of course impossible to delve into the personal finances of people who claim they can't afford to eat properly. If they work full time however, I'd bet my life savings that they are wasting their income on other things. And can't afford to eat can be translated as the Spoons meals or lack of Deliveroo options. Not rice and potatoes. 

A tiny 0.1% of UK deaths were listed on the death certificate as caused by hunger or malnutrition in 2015 to 2021.

The UK has just about the lowest death rate by malnutrition on all of planet Earth.